[cmake-developers] New no-soname-option topic for e.g. Android

[Nils Gladitz]

On 28.05.2014 18:01, Vadim Zhukov wrote:
>
> > I assumed that because people kept removing the soname options for 
> their Android toolchains that SONAMEs aren't supported at all.
> >
> > It however looks like they just can't have versioned names.
> > Perhaps ignoring the VERSION/SOVERSION properties would suffice 
> since the default SONAME should work which would make this topic 
> superfluous at least for android.
> > It sounds like you probably already have all of that covered.
> >
> > Would this be the same in the OpenBSD case perhaps? Do they 
> have/want SONAMEs but don't want them versioned?
> > If this is the case this topic as-is can probably be removed again.
>
> We in OpenBSD fully support SONAME itself. But since we always version 
> shared library file names as libfoo.so.X.Y, SONAME creates more 
> problems than solves (actually, it doesn't solve a one for us). So we 
> prefer to drop SONAME entirely, and do so consistently in our Ports 
> tree, which has full support for building CMake-based software.
>

Ah thanks, good to know.
Does that mean you've got no "-Wl,-soname," whatsoever when building 
CMake based projects or that you let it produce unversioned SONAMEs with 
e.g. "-Wl,-soname,libfoo.so" (instead of "-Wl,-soname,libfoo.so.X.Y")?

In case you drop "-Wl,-soname" entirely ... how do you work around the 
issue of the linker using paths rather than names in NEEDED entries?
Or does the issue not exist on OpenBSD?

Nils