From owner-freebsd-current Fri Nov 8 13:30:33 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8789037B401 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:30:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5B8243E77 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:30:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gA8LUQpk032706; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:30:27 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 14:30:19 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20021108.143019.08321200.imp@bsdimp.com> To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu Cc: eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com, ataraxia@cox.net, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [PATCH] note the __sF change in src/UPDATING From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20021108174915.GA71225@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20021108.092732.124899267.imp@bsdimp.com> <20021108174915.GA71225@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.2 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message: <20021108174915.GA71225@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Steve Kargl writes: : On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 12:17:00PM -0500, Daniel Eischen wrote: : > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote: : > : > > : > > Yes, but this is too painful. If we were going to do this, the time : > > for the pain was 6-9 months ago, not just before the release. : > : > All the ports are going to be rebuilt for the release anyways, : > so this doesn't affect fresh installs, correct? It is only a : > problem when mixing older 4.x and 5.0 libraries/binaries with : > __sF-free libc (if I understand things correctly). : > : > This is 5.0; it is a major release and there will be some flies : > in the ointment. I say bite the bullet now -- don't wait. : : I agree with Dan. Let's do it now. My understanding is : that 5.0 will be an "early adopter" release and production : systems should run 4.7{8,9,..} until 5.1 is released. That's not a viable option. Even if 5.0 is an early adapter release, then that would argue for keeping __sF in libc to aid in the transition. : To accomplish the change, I think we need to do: : 1. Install a complete set of 4.7 shared libs in COMPAT4X. : This should porivde the necessary runtime compatibility : with 4.x. That's not true. You can't mix and match 4.x and 5.x packages right now. : 2. Bump all shared library on 5.0. This will get rid of : any interdependencies among the libraries and it deals : with the version number problems I detailed in the thread : "Ghost of __sF ..." a couple a days ago. Not a viable option. Unless you have patches that do this properly for ports, where we are getting screwed now. : 3. Put a big fat WARNING in src/UPDATING about the problem Been there, done that, didn't help. : 4. Put the same WARNING in /etc/motd, so people currently : run -current will know to update their ports. : 5. Broadcast the WARNING to appropriate mailing lists and : newsgroups. Been there, done that, didn't help. So in short, these plans won't help anything :-(. My plan is as follows: 1) Restore __sF to libc for 5.0. 2) Fix 4.x binaries so that __sF isn't referened in new binaries. This should have been done in Aug 2001, but wasn't. Depending on how things go, __sF will be removed in 5.1 or 5.2 after we have the transition period we had originally planned for 4.x, but implemented a year ago. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message