On Saturday 09 October 2010, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 19:34:12 +0200
> "Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas" wrote:
>
> > The autotools build system uses libtool, and these funny numbers are
> > a consequence of the libtool numbering scheme. The numbers are
> > absurd, BTW. What means the c
On Oct 9, 2010, at 6:33 AM, James Le Cuirot wrote:
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 19:34:12 +0200
"Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas" wrote:
The autotools build system uses libtool, and these funny numbers are
a consequence of the libtool numbering scheme. The numbers are
absurd, BTW. What means the current version
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 19:34:12 +0200
"Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas" wrote:
> The autotools build system uses libtool, and these funny numbers are
> a consequence of the libtool numbering scheme. The numbers are
> absurd, BTW. What means the current version number "6.0.0"?
I read this article today and th
On Oct 8, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas wrote:
Then, you shouldn't allow to upgrade packages created with both
build systems.
This is a packaging problem. One solution may be to add an "epoch"
number,
like Debian does sometimes, to the package created using the CMake
build
sys
On Thursday 30 September 2010, Ebrahim Mayat wrote:
> Hello again
>
> In the transition from autotools to cmake on OS X, I came across
> version number compatibility issue for the libfluidsynth shared
> library..
The new CMake build system is not an exact copy of the autotools. That is not
t
Hello again
In the transition from autotools to cmake on OS X, I came across
version number compatibility issue for the libfluidsynth shared
library..
The names and version numbers of libfluidsynth are:
1. using autotools for the previous version of fluidsynth-1.1.1
/sw/lib/libfluidsynth.
