Skip to content

Conversation

@robert-scheck
Copy link
Contributor

A simple attempt to address #11. If you would like to go into this direction in general, it could be improved, e.g. moving the soversion definitions to configure.in and/or making the shared linking for the binaries optional using a ./configure option.

This modernizes my previous pull request from https://bitbucket.org/ripencc/bgpdump/pull-requests/28/introduce-soname-versioning proposed at 2019-04-28.

@spakka
Copy link
Collaborator

spakka commented Nov 5, 2023

Hi Robert,

Sorry it's taken a while for me to look at this.

I had first merged your CI PRs to help spot problems. As this PR was created before the actions existed, the CI checks were not run. So I merged your PR into my own fork that has been recently rebased, and the CI checks fail on some build issues with your change (https://github.com/spakka/bgpdump/actions?query=branch%3Asoname-versioning)

Can you rebase your branch against the latest master to bring in the CI checks, and then have a look at the build failures for this PR please?

Also, for now please set SO Version to 1.6.2, thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants