View Single Post
Old 30 January 2018, 18:29   #2126
PeterK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hangover
Posts: 1,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amiga68k View Post
Hi Peter, not stumbled into any issues with this version yet I do have a question though.

What is the reasoning behind the 'different approach' of using the version string? I notice that the 3 last digits are part of the lib_IdString, but are missing in the lib_Version value. Output from the shell always displays 46.4 in this case. Or will this be bumped to 46.5 or something when you are happy with the result?
Thanks for testing the library, Amiga68k!

What you discovered is a limitation of the Version instruction concerning the version output for libraries and devices. Lib_Version is always the word with the value 46 and lib_Revision the word with the value 4 for my library. There is no definition for a lib_Build or similar in the library structure. So a simple call "Version icon.library" would return 46.4. If you add the option FULL then the version command also looks into the lib_IdString for something in brackets and displays it, which is usually the the date string. But Version would not display the complete lib_IdString, because it's safer to take name, version and revision from ln_Name, lib_Version and lib_Revision. Lib_IdString could be everything like "IconLib forever!". Even so, it's possible to get my full lib_IdString with the Version command because I've inserted the string "$VER:" in front of the lib_IdString. Just read the file with "Version Libs:icon.library FILE FULL" and you will get the complete information including the build number.

Update: The "$VER:" string is only required for some other tools, probably not for the Version command.

@indigolemon
Thanks for your feedback!

Last edited by PeterK; 30 January 2018 at 22:07.
PeterK is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04149 seconds with 10 queries