From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Feb 13 20:44:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mobile.wemm.org (c1315225-a.plstn1.sfba.home.com [65.0.135.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E288937B491 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:44:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from netplex.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mobile.wemm.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1E4iLU70786 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:44:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Message-Id: <200102140444.f1E4iLU70786@mobile.wemm.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposal on shared libs version values. In-Reply-To: <20010214151748.Q90937@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:44:21 -0800 From: Peter Wemm Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Peter Jeremy wrote: > Firstly, I also like the idea of a `development' shared library version > that can change as necessary before -CURRENT forks at each major release. > > On 2001-Feb-13 13:09:26 -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 11:41:41AM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > >> When libc is built, we could link it with "-h libc.so.5-13-Feb-2001" > > > >Actually I think I like libc.so.5. to stand for a development > >version of libc.so.5 better than the libc.so.500 scheme. > > It's not clear to me whether you are proposing that be the > date of the buildworld, or the date of the last library API change. > > In the former case, you wind up bloating /usr/lib much faster[1] and > the values don't mean anything to anyone else (since it depends > what timezone you are in and when you ran buildworld). Neither > case handles the situation where multiple API changes occur in a day - > which might be rare but isn't entirely impossible. No way will we do the former. And if we have to do something that has two bumps in the same day, we're doing something badly wrong. The idea is NOT to make it a free-for-all bumping frenzy (remember poor bento has to deal with a bump!), but bump only when we cannot avoid it without causing an anreasonable amount of developer pain. Minor things can be easily worked around, but big stuff (like a buildworld will hose your machine) needs a bump. When we have to bump, use the current YYYYMMDD date. As Doug Rabson so elegantly put it: The last thing we need is for people to waste valuable development time working around version number problems. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message