From owner-cvs-all Thu Sep 23 11:19:32 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from arc.hq.cti.ru (arc.hq.cti.ru [195.34.40.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4DE414E38; Thu, 23 Sep 1999 11:19:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dima@tejblum.pp.ru) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by arc.hq.cti.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) with UUCP id WAA38825; Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:17:19 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from dima@tejblum.pp.ru) Received: from tejblum.pp.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tejblum.pp.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA04205; Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:20:19 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from dima@tejblum.pp.ru) Message-Id: <199909231820.WAA04205@tejblum.pp.ru> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 To: Marcel Moolenaar Cc: Dmitrij Tejblum , Nate Williams , cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org From: Dmitrij Tejblum Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/secure/lib/libcrypt Makefile src/lib/libcrypt Makefile In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 23 Sep 1999 15:36:07 +0200." <37EA2CC7.6654633D@scc.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:20:19 +0400 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > Dmitrij Tejblum wrote: > > > > Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > This is comparing apples with peers. Interpreters either supply > > > versioning information to the source code or they don't. If they do, > > > then it should be used to handle incompatibilities in a user friendly > > > way. I they don't, then you obviously don't have a choice, other than > > > writing backwards compatible code as much as possible. > > > > ELF is an interpreted language. > > The interesting now part of the program would look somewhat like this: > > INTERP /usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1 > > NEEDED libcrypt.so.2 > > NEEDED libc.so.3 > > If ELF and interpreted languages were similar, then why aren't we > programming with version numbers in every freaking statement? There is no version numbers here. There are filenames here. Just like in a shell script. > > (The INTERP line is handled by the kernel in a way similar to '#!' line > > in a script. The rest is handled by the *ELF interpreter*. --- I just > > want to convince you that it is indeed _very_ similar) > > The difference is, like you said, that /bin/sh doesn't contain a version > number in it's name. > > Don't stretch your point, you're being silly. You are being blind. Of course, there is a difference: Binary interfaces are much less flexible than, say, the command line interfaces. It is hard to imagine that a new version of a shell utility will be really confused (e.g. segfault) if it is used in the old way. But such a thing is not that difficult to imagine for a binary interface. For _this_ reason, as a workaround, shared libraries expected to be renamed sometimes. This rename, by convention, is done by "version bump". Is it clear now that the version numbers have nothing to do with the feature set? Dima To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message