Documentation, Release 1.4.5 Let’s suppose that both are being compiled as static libraries, and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1.0 through the public headers has not changed at all. Then, it is not the final consumer will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. It could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/ 1.0 binary, for assumes semver compatibility, i.e, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1 conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. Exactly

The answer: It depends. Let’s suppose that both are being compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers has not changed at all. Then, it is will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary for semver compatibility. e.g., if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1 Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. Exactly

The answer: It depends. Let’s suppose that both are being compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers has not changed at all. Then, it is will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary for semver compatibility. e.g., if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1 Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. Exactly

answer: It depends. Let’s assume that both packages are compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers, has not changed at all. In this case will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in the public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary compatibility. For example, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1, Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. This

answer: It depends. Let’s assume that both packages are compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers, has not changed at all. In this case will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in the public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary compatibility. For example, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1, Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. This

answer: It depends. Let’s assume that both packages are compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers, has not changed at all. In this case will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in the public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary compatibility. For example, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1, Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. This

answer: It depends. Let’s assume that both packages are compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers, has not changed at all. In this case will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in the public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary compatibility. For example, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1, Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. This

answer: It depends. Let’s assume that both packages are compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers, has not changed at all. In this case will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in the public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary compatibility. For example, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1, Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. This

answer: It depends. Let’s assume that both packages are compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers, has not changed at all. In this case will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in the public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary compatibility. For example, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1, Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. This

answer: It depends. Let’s assume that both packages are compiled as static libraries and that the API exposed by MyOtherLib to MyLib/1. 0 through the public headers, has not changed at all. In this case will link against both Mylib/1.0 and MyOtherLib/2.1. On the other hand, it could happen that the API exposed by MyOtherLib in the public headers has changed, but without affecting the MyLib/1.0 binary compatibility. For example, if a version changes from minor 2.0 to 2.1, Conan will assume that the API is compatible (headers not changing), and that it is not necessary to build a new binary for it. This