From octave-maintainers-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu  Thu May 22 11:44:26 1997
Subject: Octave versions
From: Kurt Hornik <Kurt dot Hornik at ci dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
To: octave-maintainers at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu
CC: weingessel at ci dot tuwien dot ac dot at, "John W. Eaton" <jwe@bevo.che.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 18:43:38 +0200

Just happened that Andreas walked a long 3 yards from his office to mine
to make me understand what the real problem is (I guess what he
mentioned started the thread).  When building a newer version which is
DYNAMICALLY linked, we have the problem that the shared libs get
overwritten.  In that sense, it is not possible to have a stable and a
development version installed at the same time.

To solve that problem, I suggest that the SHARED libraries should be
given version numbers (or release numbers, but version numbers should be
simpler).  So there would be
	/usr/local/lib/liboctave.so.2.0.6
and the key thing is that the octave binary would be linked against that
and not against /usr/local/lib/liboctave.so.

(The stable libs could just have major numbers ...)

Of course, how to get rid of obsolete libs might be an issue.  But it is
the same as getting rid of the octave-${version} binaries ...

Sorry for being a bit slow ...

-k