[zeromq-dev] Why has the zeromq soname changed in 3.x and 4.x?

[Dylan Cali]

Ok, thanks for the explanation Pieter.

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:
> In commit 6f1d11, "Problem: 4.1 broke the ABI yet did not bump ABI
> number" and then commit cac0f9
> (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=743508).
>
> The 4.1 breakage was the size of the zmq_msg_t I believe. A quick diff
> of the API in zmq.h doesn't show other breaks. (Only new stuff.)
> Arguably the ABI update wasn't justified.
>
> The 3->4 update was probably justified, even though the methods
> affected weren't core ones.
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Dylan Cali <calid1984 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I wanted to confirm that the ABI across zeromq 3 and 4 is compatible
>> (i.e. new functions were only added, existing function
>> signatures/semantics have not changed).
>>
>> If so, I'm curious why the soname major version has been updated,
>> first from 3 -> 4, and now from 4 -> 5?  I thought soname major
>> version changes should only be done to signify a new incompatible ABI,
>> that is either existing signatures have changed, or existing semantics
>> have changed.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dylan
>> _______________________________________________
>> zeromq-dev mailing list
>> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev