Subject: Re: bug#78754: Tree-sitter started versioning their shared library filenames

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 21:21:07 +0300

> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 18:05:12 +0100 (BST)
> From: Peter Oliver <[email-masked]>
> cc: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>,
>         Stéphane Marks <[email-masked]>,
>         [email-masked]
> 
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2025, Yuan Fu wrote:
> 
> >> On Jun 11, 2025, at 5:41 AM, Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Indeed, I think the loop should be in the opposite direction, from
> >> the highest supported ABI version to the lowest.
> >
> > We’re adding candidates using Fcons, so candidates added later are in the front of the list, no?
> 
> So we currently prefer the bare libtree-sitter-foo.so to any versioned files?  Shouldn’t that one be the last resort?

Why should it?  isn't it standard practice on Posix systems to make
foo.so a symlink to a versioned foo-N.M.so?