You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4cxx-user@logging.apache.org by "Bonneau, Guy" <Gu...@grassvalley.com> on 2017/12/19 16:37:33 UTC
Next release
I am trying to compile under Ubuntu and Gentoo the apache log4cxx next stable release at: https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/next_stable/download.html . I saw that the shared library are still created with versionning .10. Shouln't the definition of variable LT_VERSION in configure.ac be incremented to version 11 ?
Thanks
GB
Re: Re: Re: Next release
Posted by "Bonneau, Guy" <Gu...@grassvalley.com>.
Then this would means that the ABI version number of the library is bound to the compiler used for the compilation of the code since the library is C++. We have found that GNU g++ 4.9 compiler and GNU g++ 5.1 compilation of the log4cxx library produces imcompatible symbolic name of exported C++ variables. This is because the GNU GCC developers has to introduce a new ABI for the support of the 2011 C++ standard. See the link below:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/using_dual_abi.html
GB
________________________________________
From: Robert Middleton <os...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 10:13 AM
To: Log4CXX User
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: Next release
My understanding is that the numbers at the end of the library
version(e.g. liblog4cxx.so.10.0.0) are for the ABI version, not the
software version. See the guide here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__autotools.io_libtool_version.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=Bg5XULDZR8GiOSSWNlpkCsRePnGDkKcI6oYL9xv1MnQ&r=FS_sYZOzl9JFXNzFbJy3VRLa4Kton7YEcXPfx0WjQRA&m=TZL5wqTshd4eAL3zgC1d1Ir6GySXG4NepTPFBdn5C3k&s=Ye5FVID_mDP6qizlzJLv1vOTslxzjjSN7zW0IuTFyEc&e=
They generally follow(at least somewhat) the package version, but I
think the reasoning is that if you can have two different versions of
the same library installed, and as long as they have a different ABI
they will use the appropriate version of the .so file(e.g. a program
can link with liblog4cxx.so.10, and if there is a newer version that
is not ABI compatible installed as liblog4cxx.so.11, it won't load the
ABI-incompatible version). I think there are tools out there that can
help determine if the ABI has actually changed or not.
-Robert Middleton
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Bonneau, Guy
<Gu...@grassvalley.com> wrote:
> I'm not a Linux expert but I believe the convention under Linux is:
>
> liblog4cxx.so.MAJOR.MINOR.BUILD
>
> Having many years elapsed since the last liblog4cxx release I think it would be less confusing for Linux developers using the log4cxx library to see the next version of the library increment to 10.1.0. It makes more sense to increment the MINOR number than the BUILD number.
>
> Thus personaly I would prefer the next release version to be liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
>
> Once you made up your own mind about which version numbering you will use to release the library it is possible to commit an RC4 with the LT_VERSION set for the next release version in file configure.ac. We would like to get a snapshot of the GIT repository and thoroughly test the new candidate release. We have a product that uses the log4cxx library with both Windows and Linux.
>
> Regards
> Guy
> ________________________________________
> From: Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 2:39 AM
> To: Log4CXX User
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Next release
>
> Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
> am Mittwoch, 20. Dezember 2017 um 20:39 schrieben Sie:
>
>> Then what value do you expect to set for the next release since it
>> cannot stay the same? Since the API doesn't change do you expect to
>> set LT_VERSION to have liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0 or liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
>
> Why not liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1? That's how I understand the docs in
> configure.ac and I could try to implement a default increment of
> LT_VERSION in the release-scripts available currently.
>
> LT_VERSION=10:1:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1
> LT_VERSION=11:0:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0
>
> One of those is what I would prefer. While using the last line might
> be wrong if no breaking interface was introduced, auto-incrementing
> it should always work as well.
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
> Thorsten Schöning
>
> --
> Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
> AM-SoFT IT-Systeme https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.AM-2DSoFT.de_&d=DwIFAw&c=Bg5XULDZR8GiOSSWNlpkCsRePnGDkKcI6oYL9xv1MnQ&r=FS_sYZOzl9JFXNzFbJy3VRLa4Kton7YEcXPfx0WjQRA&m=7ruxZWW4EsXu4HsZKx1nSch1Ehj176vqus0rpZZaNwQ&s=FsSHX_5xxvAw9bCLCuwg0mY5Gqfwm9-hqb5fBIIv33Q&e=
>
> Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
> Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
> Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
>
> AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
> AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
>
> **********************************************************************
> DISCLAIMER:
> Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.
**********************************************************************
DISCLAIMER:
Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.
Re: Re: Next release
Posted by Robert Middleton <os...@gmail.com>.
My understanding is that the numbers at the end of the library
version(e.g. liblog4cxx.so.10.0.0) are for the ABI version, not the
software version. See the guide here:
https://autotools.io/libtool/version.html
They generally follow(at least somewhat) the package version, but I
think the reasoning is that if you can have two different versions of
the same library installed, and as long as they have a different ABI
they will use the appropriate version of the .so file(e.g. a program
can link with liblog4cxx.so.10, and if there is a newer version that
is not ABI compatible installed as liblog4cxx.so.11, it won't load the
ABI-incompatible version). I think there are tools out there that can
help determine if the ABI has actually changed or not.
-Robert Middleton
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Bonneau, Guy
<Gu...@grassvalley.com> wrote:
> I'm not a Linux expert but I believe the convention under Linux is:
>
> liblog4cxx.so.MAJOR.MINOR.BUILD
>
> Having many years elapsed since the last liblog4cxx release I think it would be less confusing for Linux developers using the log4cxx library to see the next version of the library increment to 10.1.0. It makes more sense to increment the MINOR number than the BUILD number.
>
> Thus personaly I would prefer the next release version to be liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
>
> Once you made up your own mind about which version numbering you will use to release the library it is possible to commit an RC4 with the LT_VERSION set for the next release version in file configure.ac. We would like to get a snapshot of the GIT repository and thoroughly test the new candidate release. We have a product that uses the log4cxx library with both Windows and Linux.
>
> Regards
> Guy
> ________________________________________
> From: Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 2:39 AM
> To: Log4CXX User
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Next release
>
> Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
> am Mittwoch, 20. Dezember 2017 um 20:39 schrieben Sie:
>
>> Then what value do you expect to set for the next release since it
>> cannot stay the same? Since the API doesn't change do you expect to
>> set LT_VERSION to have liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0 or liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
>
> Why not liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1? That's how I understand the docs in
> configure.ac and I could try to implement a default increment of
> LT_VERSION in the release-scripts available currently.
>
> LT_VERSION=10:1:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1
> LT_VERSION=11:0:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0
>
> One of those is what I would prefer. While using the last line might
> be wrong if no breaking interface was introduced, auto-incrementing
> it should always work as well.
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
> Thorsten Schöning
>
> --
> Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
> AM-SoFT IT-Systeme https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.AM-2DSoFT.de_&d=DwIFAw&c=Bg5XULDZR8GiOSSWNlpkCsRePnGDkKcI6oYL9xv1MnQ&r=FS_sYZOzl9JFXNzFbJy3VRLa4Kton7YEcXPfx0WjQRA&m=7ruxZWW4EsXu4HsZKx1nSch1Ehj176vqus0rpZZaNwQ&s=FsSHX_5xxvAw9bCLCuwg0mY5Gqfwm9-hqb5fBIIv33Q&e=
>
> Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
> Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
> Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
>
> AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
> AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
>
> **********************************************************************
> DISCLAIMER:
> Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.
Re: Next release
Posted by Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>.
Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
am Donnerstag, 21. Dezember 2017 um 15:07 schrieben Sie:
> Once you made up your own mind about which version numbering you
> will use to release the library it is possible to commit an RC4 with
> the LT_VERSION set for the next release version in file
> configure.ac. We would like to get a snapshot of the GIT repository
> and thoroughly test the new candidate release. We have a product
> that uses the log4cxx library with both Windows and Linux.
Be careful, the current RC-tags are only there because I tested
release-scripts. They don't really mean anything and I deleted those
tags in the past already and will do so with the current ones until I
feel the scripts are finished.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Thorsten Schöning
--
Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme http://www.AM-SoFT.de/
Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
Re: Re: Next release
Posted by "Bonneau, Guy" <Gu...@grassvalley.com>.
I'm not a Linux expert but I believe the convention under Linux is:
liblog4cxx.so.MAJOR.MINOR.BUILD
Having many years elapsed since the last liblog4cxx release I think it would be less confusing for Linux developers using the log4cxx library to see the next version of the library increment to 10.1.0. It makes more sense to increment the MINOR number than the BUILD number.
Thus personaly I would prefer the next release version to be liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
Once you made up your own mind about which version numbering you will use to release the library it is possible to commit an RC4 with the LT_VERSION set for the next release version in file configure.ac. We would like to get a snapshot of the GIT repository and thoroughly test the new candidate release. We have a product that uses the log4cxx library with both Windows and Linux.
Regards
Guy
________________________________________
From: Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 2:39 AM
To: Log4CXX User
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Next release
Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
am Mittwoch, 20. Dezember 2017 um 20:39 schrieben Sie:
> Then what value do you expect to set for the next release since it
> cannot stay the same? Since the API doesn't change do you expect to
> set LT_VERSION to have liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0 or liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
Why not liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1? That's how I understand the docs in
configure.ac and I could try to implement a default increment of
LT_VERSION in the release-scripts available currently.
LT_VERSION=10:1:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1
LT_VERSION=11:0:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0
One of those is what I would prefer. While using the last line might
be wrong if no breaking interface was introduced, auto-incrementing
it should always work as well.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Thorsten Schöning
--
Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.AM-2DSoFT.de_&d=DwIFAw&c=Bg5XULDZR8GiOSSWNlpkCsRePnGDkKcI6oYL9xv1MnQ&r=FS_sYZOzl9JFXNzFbJy3VRLa4Kton7YEcXPfx0WjQRA&m=7ruxZWW4EsXu4HsZKx1nSch1Ehj176vqus0rpZZaNwQ&s=FsSHX_5xxvAw9bCLCuwg0mY5Gqfwm9-hqb5fBIIv33Q&e=
Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
**********************************************************************
DISCLAIMER:
Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.
Re: Next release
Posted by Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>.
Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
am Mittwoch, 20. Dezember 2017 um 20:39 schrieben Sie:
> Then what value do you expect to set for the next release since it
> cannot stay the same? Since the API doesn't change do you expect to
> set LT_VERSION to have liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0 or liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
Why not liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1? That's how I understand the docs in
configure.ac and I could try to implement a default increment of
LT_VERSION in the release-scripts available currently.
LT_VERSION=10:1:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1
LT_VERSION=11:0:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0
One of those is what I would prefer. While using the last line might
be wrong if no breaking interface was introduced, auto-incrementing
it should always work as well.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Thorsten Schöning
--
Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme http://www.AM-SoFT.de/
Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
Re: Re: Next release
Posted by "Bonneau, Guy" <Gu...@grassvalley.com>.
Good!
Then what value do you expect to set for the next release since it cannot stay the same? Since the API doesn't change do you expect to set LT_VERSION to have liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0 or liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0 ?
Thanks
GB
________________________________________
From: Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 1:09 PM
To: Log4CXX User
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Next release
Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
am Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2017 um 21:28 schrieben Sie:
> I have had to change LT_VERSION=10:0:0 to
> LT_VERSION=11:0:1 to have the linker make the version of the shared
> library to liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0.
Some additional examples:
LT_VERSION=10:1:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1
LT_VERSION=0:10:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.0.0.10
LT_VERSION=0:11:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.0.0.11
LT_VERSION=0:11:1 -> libtool: link: AGE `1` is greater than the current interface number `0`
LT_VERSION=11:0:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0
LT_VERSION=11:0:1 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
The first 3 lines are how I would understand the docs, 11:0:0 seems to
be what was simply done in the past.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Thorsten Schöning
--
Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.AM-2DSoFT.de_&d=DwIFAw&c=Bg5XULDZR8GiOSSWNlpkCsRePnGDkKcI6oYL9xv1MnQ&r=FS_sYZOzl9JFXNzFbJy3VRLa4Kton7YEcXPfx0WjQRA&m=NxTdMcfhPo5-7J0GZ9dYPfrNO7V3TEWZJYiQeTA0d7c&s=hg8M85nCZlejWkLZRw482GLZxd8JzZ3tsr9MgQXqzig&e=
Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
**********************************************************************
DISCLAIMER:
Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.
Re: Next release
Posted by Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>.
Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
am Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2017 um 21:28 schrieben Sie:
> I have had to change LT_VERSION=10:0:0 to
> LT_VERSION=11:0:1 to have the linker make the version of the shared
> library to liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0.
Some additional examples:
LT_VERSION=10:1:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.0.1
LT_VERSION=0:10:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.0.0.10
LT_VERSION=0:11:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.0.0.11
LT_VERSION=0:11:1 -> libtool: link: AGE `1` is greater than the current interface number `0`
LT_VERSION=11:0:0 -> liblog4cxx.so.11.0.0
LT_VERSION=11:0:1 -> liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0
The first 3 lines are how I would understand the docs, 11:0:0 seems to
be what was simply done in the past.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Thorsten Schöning
--
Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme http://www.AM-SoFT.de/
Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
Re: Re: Next release
Posted by "Bonneau, Guy" <Gu...@grassvalley.com>.
I am using the sources from the GIT commit with tag v0.11.0-RC3 . I took a snapshot of it. I generate the configuration script with the autogen.sh script and then do the make.
I am not familiar with the autotool and autoconf tool. I am only trying to compile the RC3 under Ubuntu 16.04 and a custom Gentoo distribution. I am successful to compile but the version of the shared library is liblog4cxx.so.10.0.0. The same as the previous release. I have had to change LT_VERSION=10:0:0 to LT_VERSION=11:0:1 to have the linker make the version of the shared library to liblog4cxx.so.10.1.0. But I don't know why and the documentation is not clear either for me.
Maybe a user who has a good understanding of autoconf could provide some info about this.
Thanks
GB
________________________________________
From: Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 1:16 PM
To: Log4CXX User
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Next release
Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
am Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2017 um 17:37 schrieben Sie:
> I am trying to compile under Ubuntu and Gentoo the apache log4cxx
> next stable release at:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__logging.apache.org_log4cxx_next-5Fstable_download.html&d=DwIFAw&c=Bg5XULDZR8GiOSSWNlpkCsRePnGDkKcI6oYL9xv1MnQ&r=FS_sYZOzl9JFXNzFbJy3VRLa4Kton7YEcXPfx0WjQRA&m=rFrmQKDpBZ5P7SKkJxalFd0HXDba6ejzdg8sSiLitD8&s=BEKKlnIKDfEU8Eb9kO2IJTxwGniY5c8FYoCxzGXr1cs&e= .
With which files are you testing? That page mentions files not
existing currently und there's no "next_stable" branch in the sources.
Are you simply testing with master?
> I saw
> that the shared library are still created with versionning .10.
> Shouln't the definition of variable LT_VERSION in configure.ac be incremented to version 11 ?
I wasn't sure how this thing is used, because from my understanding of
the docs above that line I had the feeling that 10:1:0 should be used
next, because we have no breaking interfaces I'm aware of. Looking at
the history of that thing, it seems to only be increased by one.
So what is the correct usage? I didn't find any useful docs.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Thorsten Schöning
--
Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.AM-2DSoFT.de_&d=DwIFAw&c=Bg5XULDZR8GiOSSWNlpkCsRePnGDkKcI6oYL9xv1MnQ&r=FS_sYZOzl9JFXNzFbJy3VRLa4Kton7YEcXPfx0WjQRA&m=rFrmQKDpBZ5P7SKkJxalFd0HXDba6ejzdg8sSiLitD8&s=-FgxyhFjtdt1u36K4LTSEs8yfSL_NasfmEHEG_H46Zg&e=
Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
**********************************************************************
DISCLAIMER:
Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.
Re: Next release
Posted by Thorsten Schöning <ts...@am-soft.de>.
Guten Tag Bonneau, Guy,
am Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2017 um 17:37 schrieben Sie:
> I am trying to compile under Ubuntu and Gentoo the apache log4cxx
> next stable release at:
> https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/next_stable/download.html .
With which files are you testing? That page mentions files not
existing currently und there's no "next_stable" branch in the sources.
Are you simply testing with master?
> I saw
> that the shared library are still created with versionning .10.
> Shouln't the definition of variable LT_VERSION in configure.ac be incremented to version 11 ?
I wasn't sure how this thing is used, because from my understanding of
the docs above that line I had the feeling that 10:1:0 should be used
next, because we have no breaking interfaces I'm aware of. Looking at
the history of that thing, it seems to only be increased by one.
So what is the correct usage? I didn't find any useful docs.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Thorsten Schöning
--
Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: Thorsten.Schoening@AM-SoFT.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme http://www.AM-SoFT.de/
Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55
Fax...............05151- 9468- 88
Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04
AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow