Sub-library version numbers

[Allan Sandfeld Jensen]

On Friday 07 June 2002 11:57, Dirk Mueller wrote:
> On Fre, 07 Jun 2002, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > Since libraries with the same major number are supposed to be backwards
> > compatible this is not a problem.
>
> It is a problem, because it depends now on the installation order. Usual
> RPMs produce the symlinks in their postinstall script to allow several
> versions of the lib to be installed (well, some others do not, but those
> are broken anyway).
>
> This means the correct functioning depends on the order of installation.
> Given that people start to experiment with their installation as sonn as
> something doesn't work, this is quite likely to be a problem.
>
How is this different from any other project? I cant imagine any distributions 
where this turns into a problem, since they need to resolve the issue anyway 
for all other packages containing libraries.
KDE libraries are the only ones I know that doesnt use proper library 
versions.

Seems to me like unfounded fear.