On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 22:11, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>>> Do we know what the exact pattern would be for .sl and .dylib? Are
>>> they following the same basic pattern of .sl.<major>.<minor>?
>
>> Yes, they'll be just the same --- Makefile.shlib treats all those
>> extensions alike.
>
> I take that back. Darwin does things differently, bless their pointy
> little heads:
>
> DLSUFFIX = .dylib
> shlib = lib$(NAME).$(SO_MAJOR_VERSION).$(SO_MINOR_VERSION)$(DLSUFFIX)
>
> So it looks like *.dylib is sufficient and we don't need anything with
> numbers afterwards for that variant.
Ok. Just to be clear, here's what I have now:
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
