Modified revamp of the libsmbclient interface.

Derrell Lipman derrell.lipman at
Sun Mar 2 22:34:19 GMT 2008

This was supposed to be replied to the list...

On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at> wrote:
>  > Yup, that's right.  No changes required to 13 of the 16 test programs.
>  >  Of the other 3, there were only a few lines of changes.
>  Which were?

I've given examples in the WHATSNEW.txt file.  It's now checked in to 3-2-test.

>  > Given the limited amount of change required at the source level, and
>  > the now eliminated need for any change of previously compiled programs
>  > (since it's ABI compatible), I don't think it's necessary nor prudent
>  > to have parallel libraries.  With parallel libraries, neither will get
>  > as much testing as it should.
>  But if you do change it in an incompatible way, then you *must* bump
>  the .so version, which means you force a recompile (at least), and then
>  we are back to the original problem of forcing a samba-compat onto
>  distributions.

I'm not changing it in an incompoatible way (nor do I plan to, as that
would only have been done at a major Samba version number bump), so I
don't think the .so version number needs a bump.  The .so works with
existing compiled apps so shouldn't need a version bump.  It's ABI
compatible.  A version bump should only be required if it's not ABI


More information about the samba-technical mailing list