Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:03:21 -0800
From:      Sean McNeil <sean@mcneil.com>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: MFC of bump in libcom_err.so another mistake?
Message-ID:  <7B0411F5-FCBC-40BC-94CA-2B8AA13FA783@mcneil.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060131235035.B95776@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <1138476952.86610.1.camel@triton.mcneil.com> <20060131235035.B95776@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Jan 31, 2006, at 3:52 PM, Robert Watson wrote:

>
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Sean McNeil wrote:
>
>> I was wondering if this was on purpose.  Seems like there is no  
>> good reason that it was done on -STABLE and it has really messed  
>> up everything here for me.
>>
>> libcom_err.so.2 bumped to libcom_err.so.3.
>
> It was on purpose, but not necessarily for a good reason.  Could  
> you be more specific about "really messed up everything here for  
> me", which sounds a lot to me like "and all hell broken loose"?  I  
> assume there's some sort of library and application versioning  
> problem, but some details would be helpful.

I had several big packages that depended on kerberos and they all  
broke because:

1) libcom_err.so.2.1 was moved to /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg/
2) The symlink libcom_err.so.2 was removed and nothing was placed in  
compat.

I finally got smart and just added an entry to libmap.conf and so I'm  
not "really messed up...".  That was not accurate in the first place :)

> In principle, other than potentially requiring compat libs to run  
> old binaries even though that may not strictly have been necessary,  
> it seems likely that a binary depending on the old libcom_err  
> depends also on an old libc.  On the other hand, I consider library  
> version number interactions to be mysterious, and likely have  
> missed the point.  :-)

The point I am making is that this is in the -STABLE tree, not the - 
CURRENT tree.  There is no bump of libc and I don't see any reason  
for the libcom_err.so revision bump in -STABLE.  IMHO, it didn't make  
sense.

Cheers,
Sean




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7B0411F5-FCBC-40BC-94CA-2B8AA13FA783>