libtool, how should the version be parsed?

Charles Wilson
Sat May 16 03:50:00 GMT 2009

René Berber wrote:
> Hi,
> I was trying to build some package and it complained that libtool 1.4
> was needed... looking at the version:
> $ libtool --version
> libtool (GNU libtool 1.3081 2009-02-17) 2.2.7a
> Is it 1.3081 or 2.2.7a?

It is 2.2.7a.  You can see that from the announcement here:
"[1.7] Updated: {libtool/libltdl7}-2.2.7a-12"


$ cygcheck -cd libtool
Package              Version
libtool              2.2.7a-12

> I see at that the latest stable is 2.2.6a, so I suppose the one
> in Cygwin (1.7) is the bleeding edge.  Any trick/idea on how to use it
> with packages that expect something sane as version.

This format
   "libtool (GNU libtool 1.3081 2009-02-17) 2.2.7a"
is the GNU standard, as documented here:

> The first line is meant to be easy for a program to parse; the version
> number proper starts after the last space."


> If the program is a subsidiary part of a larger package, mention the
> package name in parentheses, like this:
>      emacsserver (GNU Emacs) 19.30
> If the package has a version number which is different from this
> program's version number, you can mention the package version number
> just before the close-parenthesis.

So, if you had build stock libtool-2.2.6(a), and ran --version on it,
you would have seen:

    libtool (GNU libtool 1.nnnn 2008-mm-dd) 2.2.6a

So, next time, kindly refrain from accusing my package of insanity.  But
while we're on the subject...libtool-1.4 dates from 27-Nov-2003, more
than 5.5 years ago...


Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list