Re: Any opposition to changing share/guile/X.Y.Z to share/guile/X.Y?

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:

> Mikael Djurfeldt <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > Without having thoroughly thought about it, I'd say it would be
> > useful to be able to install parallel micro versions, the reason being
> > that you may trust a certain micro version, but would like to do
> > development on another.
> 
> If I understand correctly, then when you install the new "development"
> micro version, it'll have a libguile with the same soname as the
> "trusted" version, and at that instant, all apps will switch to using
> the new "untrusted" lib because that's the one ldso will prefer
> version-wise (that's presuming the new libguile doesn't just clobber
> the old one if the micro version wasn't changed).
> 
> If I'm right about that,

You are.

> then are there any other arguments in favor of not dropping the
> micro revision from things like the share directory name, or would
> you be OK with it?

I have no other argument.  Also, it is "OK" with me to do as you want,
because I haven't the time to think about it.

But if you ask my current uninformed opinion, and given the current
poor status of UNIX tool for handling this kind of dependencies, I'd
say I prefer separating micro versions and recompiling things between
micro version releases. :)

Best regards,
Mikael