Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-common-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 77440F000 for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2013 07:42:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 60184 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jan 2013 07:42:18 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-issues-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 60128 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jan 2013 07:42:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact common-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: common-issues@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list common-issues@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 60082 invoked by uid 99); 2 Jan 2013 07:42:17 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas.apache.org) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 07:42:17 +0000 Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 07:42:16 +0000 (UTC) From: "Allen Wittenauer (JIRA)" To: common-issues@hadoop.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HADOOP-9164) Add version number and/or library file name to native library for easy tracking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9164?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13542046#comment-13542046 ] Allen Wittenauer commented on HADOOP-9164: ------------------------------------------ bq. Why not open a discussion on hadoop-dev about libhadoop.so version numbers? I'm not sure what value there is in doing that. The version numbers are completely fictional, confusing, and break with ancient UNIX traditions. Just tying them back to the build version a la OpenSSL would be a major step forward since that at least gives some clue about what the compatibility expectations are. bq. I don't think this JIRA is the right place to sort that out. As I said, I don't think there is anything controversial here. Fixing it should be relatively trivial (just read the generated java file and stuff it into the appropriate #define's and make vars) and would allow the version of the patch that reports library versions to go forward. > Add version number and/or library file name to native library for easy tracking > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HADOOP-9164 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9164 > Project: Hadoop Common > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: native > Affects Versions: 2.0.2-alpha > Reporter: Binglin Chang > Assignee: Binglin Chang > Priority: Minor > Attachments: HADOOP-9164.v1.patch, HADOOP-9164.v2.patch, HADOOP-9164.v3.patch > > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira