Your analysis of grpc/grpc-cpp and gtest seems reasonable to me. Thanks for having a look
at these cases.
– Ben
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023, at 4:28 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 2023-02-20 12:57, Ben Beasley wrote:
>> This is one of the C libraries, which have a more conventional integer ABI
version. For the C++ libraries, have a look at the grpc-cpp subpackage. You will find
libraries like:
>>
>> libgrpc++.so.1.48()(64bit)
>
>
> I see. That also looks like it's compatible with the proposed change.
>
> $ dnf -C repoquery --provides grpc-cpp | fgrep .so.
> libgrpc++.so.1.48
> libgrpc++.so.1.48()(64bit)
> ...
>
> ...where the full path is /usr/lib64/libgrpc++.so.1.48.3. If the ELF
> dependency generator truncated the version, it should produce
> "Requires:
> libgrpc++.so.1.48()(64bit) >= 1.48", which wouldn't really improve
> anything for this package, but for this type of package, where all
> interfaces changes are already visibly breaking changes, maybe there's
> nothing to be improved.
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
>
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
>
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue