Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 19:40:22 +0200 From: John Hay <jhay@meraka.org.za> To: Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: shared library bump, symbol versioning, libthr change Message-ID: <20070511174022.GA18899@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za> In-Reply-To: <20070511083154.0b72ff46@kan.dnsalias.net> References: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0705060923030.1180@sea.ntplx.net> <20070511083154.0b72ff46@kan.dnsalias.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 08:31:54AM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote: > On Sun, 6 May 2007 10:07:51 -0400 (EDT) > Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> wrote: > > > Sometime this coming weekend (May 11-13), I'll be committing the > > following patch: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/symver/bump_symver.diffs.050207 > > > > What does this do? > > > > o All library versions that haven't already been bumped and > > that are not new to 7.0 will be bumped. > > > > Hi, > > I always had a problem with wholesome bumpings like these. What is the > justification for such a broad sweep? libc bump CAN NOT be made an > excuse for cascaded bumps. FreeBSD does not record LIBC dependency into > shared libraries themselves, so as long as libc sybols used by the > shared library did not change ABI between libc.so.6 and libc.so.7, old > shared libraries will happily work with both. If there are are symbols > that are missing or have changed in libc.so.7 that prevent it from > being a perfect superset of libc.so.6, can we consider adding them back > instead, with FBSD_1.0 version and making changed symbols FBSD_1.1 or > some such? Sure, this will break older unversioned -current binaries as > they will start resolving to FBSD_1.0 symbols, but your bump will > obsolete them too, so -current users will need to recompile either way. > > I always thought that original LIBC bump was a mistake. > > Please consider this an objection until this matter is discussed in > more detail. Between libpthread.so.2, libc.so.6 and libc.so.7 there is enough change to make programs compiled for 6.x not work on -current. Some examples are the diablo java package (for 6.1) available from the FreeBSD Foundation site (http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/downloads/java.shtml) and the 6.x openoffice packages available from http://porting.openoffice.org/freebsd/ I'm not for or against bumping, only for unbreaking. :-) John -- John Hay -- John.Hay@meraka.csir.co.za / jhay@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070511174022.GA18899>