Libunbound version number

Unbound
1

Hi,

Is there some kind of correlation between the libunbound version number and the Unbound package version number?

I had previously compiled Unbound 1.4.13 and the library files I got in /usr/local/lib included libunbound.so.2.13.0

I just compiled the latest Unbound 1.4.18 and the new library file is libunbound.so.2.1.3

It’s not so strange that the library has a different versioning from the package, however, 2.1.3 looks like older than 2.13.0.

Has the library gone backwards? Did the versioning scheme changed?

TIA

2

Hi Mariano,

Hi,

Is there some kind of correlation between the libunbound version
number and the Unbound package version number?

I had previously compiled Unbound 1.4.13 and the library files I
got in /usr/local/lib included libunbound.so.2.13.0

I just compiled the latest Unbound 1.4.18 and the new library file
is libunbound.so.2.1.3

It's not so strange that the library has a different versioning
from the package, however, 2.1.3 looks like older than 2.13.0.

Has the library gone backwards? Did the versioning scheme changed?

It uses GNU libtool versioning, shared library versions:
http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Libtool-versioning.html

unbound version has libtool version current:revision:age
1.4.13 has 2:13:0
1.4.18 has 3:3:1

Because, at 1.4.14, the ub_version() call is added to the library,
making a new version (which is binary compatible with the previous
version). So, there is a symlink for libunbound.so.2 binary API
(thus, existing programs continue to link and run).

The shared library numbers represent the library API.

Best regards,
   Wouter

3

OK, but shouldn’t the main binary be called libunbound.so.3.1 (or something like that) instead of libunbound.so.2.1.3? That is, then you can symlink it from libunbound.so.2 and so on.

Here’s the content of my recently compiled & installed /usr/local/lib:

-rw-r–r-- 1 root staff 2615310 2012-08-16 12:34 libunbound.a
-rw-r–r-- 1 root staff 986 2012-08-16 12:34 libunbound.la
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 19 2012-08-16 12:34 libunbound.so → libunbound.so.2.1.3*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 19 2012-08-16 12:34 libunbound.so.2 → libunbound.so.2.1.3*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root staff 1719555 2012-08-16 12:34 libunbound.so.2.1.3*

4

No, it shouldn't. The ABI is still backwards compatible, there's no
reason for SONAME bump.

Please go read the document Wouter has mentioned for further
information on library versioning.

O.