2016-03-14 18:33 GMT+03:00 Slávek Banko slavek.banko@axis.cz:
Dne po 14. března 2016 Fat-Zer napsal(a): I traced that it's not a bug in autotools, but that there are two different options:
-version-info current[:revision[:age]]
If output-file is a libtool library, use interface version information current, revision, and age to build it (see Versioning). Do not use this flag to specify package release information, rather see the -release flag.
-version-number major[:minor[:revision]]
If output-file is a libtool library, compute interface version information so that the resulting library uses the specified major, minor and revision numbers. This is designed to permit libtool to be used with existing projects where identical version numbers are already used across operating systems. New projects should use the -version-info flag instead.
Source: http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Link-mode.html#Link-mod...
When instead of -version-info 3:0:2 is used -version-number 3:0:2, the library gets the expected ouptut file:
@libkolf.so @libkolf.so.3 *libkolf.so.3.0.2
Automake option -version-info is obviously something else than VERSION for cmake build. I think that's not a good idea to change the version number of the libraries, when there is no reason to do so. I therefore propose to change the in cmake files VERSION to 1.2.0.
What is your opinion?
-- Slávek
Ok... Go ahead...
I still don't really understand what the version-info is and what for libtool versioning is used but I figured out how the "1.2.0" is related to 3:0:2 : It's (current-age).(age).(revision).