On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Xiaofan Chen <xiaofanc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Saturday, June 18, 2011, Uwe Bonnes
> <bon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Xiaofan" == Xiaofan Chen <xiaofanc@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> Xiaofan> Right now. the location of libftdi-1.0 header ftdi.h is
>> Xiaofan> different from libftdi-0.1x. For libftdi-1.0, the header is in
>> Xiaofan> /usr/local/include/libftdi/ftdi.h whereas for libftdi-0.1x it
>> Xiaofan> is in /usr/local/include/ftdi.h.
>>
>> Xiaofan> I am not so sure what is the reason and whether this is a good
>> Xiaofan> idea or not.
>>
>> What is your proposal how to handle different versions of the library
>> headers?
>
> IMHO different name is the best, I.e., using libftdi.h for 1.0.
>
I think we have gone through one discussion last time. My suggestion
is not to let libftdi-1.0 API limited by the existing libftdi API and API
breakage is okay. Just like the case of libusb-1.0 versus libusb-0.1.
In this case, it is better to have different name and both can coexist
with each other and they can also exist in the same default directory.
The library for libftdi-1.0 can be libftdi-1.0.so and libftdi-1.0.a to
differentiate from libftdi-0.1x.
--
Xiaofan
--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
