This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: libjvm missing .so version number


Jack Howarth wrote:
Andrew,
   I am just trying to find out if there are any
rules in gcc development requiring shared libraries
to have some so version number. Also, I don't see
that adding one would present a huge problem. Why
can't the files in lib/gcj-4.x.x have their own
so version number that is independent of the one
for libgcj? As long as the ABI for those shared
libs don't change, I don't see why their so version
can't stay at .0 or .1.
           Jack

The library in question (libjvm.so) has different requirements than the rest of the libraries associated with gcj. It has to maintain ABI compatibility with an external specification (Sun's JNI specification). So the rules governing its versioning would be different than the rules for libgcj.so.


Another thing to consider is that libjvm should be loaded via the dlopen() mechanism and is not directly linked to the executable. This eliminates the need or usefulness of any versioning.

This said, I don't see that there would be any harm in giving it a version. But once done, the version would never be changed.

David Daney


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]