From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue May 31 16:51:17 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516C016A41C;
	Tue, 31 May 2005 16:51:17 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org)
Received: from mail.ntplx.net (mail.ntplx.net [204.213.176.10])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D038743D4C;
	Tue, 31 May 2005 16:51:16 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org)
Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11])
	by mail.ntplx.net (8.13.4/8.13.4/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id j4VGp0df008467; 
	Tue, 31 May 2005 12:51:00 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 12:51:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net
To: =?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
In-Reply-To: <86fyw32yqm.fsf@xps.des.no>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0505311248570.3368-100000@sea.ntplx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.ntplx.net)
Cc: nectar@freebsd.org, standards@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org,
	current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [CFR] correct type of addrinfo.ai_addrlen and netent.n_net
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 16:51:17 -0000

On Tue, 31 May 2005, [iso-8859-1] Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote:

> Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@freebsd.org> writes:
> > No, it is not blind bump.  The following libraries refers
> > getaddrinfo(3), thus should be bumped:
> >
> > =09=09=09RELENG_5=09HEAD=09Need to Bump
> > [...]
> > libpam=09=09=092=09=092
> > =09pam_radius=09=09=09=09o
> > =09pam_unix=09=09=09=09o
>
> You can't just bump libpam; you need to bump all the modules along
> with it, because libpam will only load modules with the same major
> number as itself.  In fact, there is only a single SHLIB_MAJOR for the
> entire src/lib/libpam tree, in src/lib/libpam/Makefile.inc.
>
> Is it really necessary to remove the padding?  It gives us a lot of
> trouble for zero gain.

And sometimes we put padding in place to allow for expansion
(ucontext for one).  I think the padding should stay.  If we
ever get symbol versioning, then you can remove it without
having to bump library versions.

--=20
DE