From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 9 19:51:39 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8916BA4 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 19:51:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-oa0-f47.google.com (mail-oa0-f47.google.com [209.85.219.47]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70844188D for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 19:51:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id m1so8477914oag.6 for ; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 12:51:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=BInQdh3Ef5s4hKjV5wr9XbqaVKnW33r7ZFNAwDHhXHs=; b=bVqEYmsxie58H4ukb1TdEhQHnmLZ7oWCZTqgMNmXmTB1INoVFLiBOVFRL1yMgLIBDh hSmBQ1tA3vs20HMsIqwnu1xfjYi5F0Bp8cl5AV1okAp7uNYy3xMOlFErLOvNRrLzUypa q+wqVr6R9FMGkxEI1KyNp7Siap1GyM9+I4wb/ooy0aRtE0AqHj/dgTdUUwlM3UfjXaLG IQJJHYpq1SkKpzEOA6AdeLOa9YP7klu67/YI3RbQOG998KAGa20K8FIXUNwGcsOmaU8U /66LKsVqmebNaQdgJy/bShKLEvIf7IVg59/aXt8NVrbbMFwHQmBzM9yu45tPtezo52Fi gOHA== X-Received: by 10.182.55.72 with SMTP id q8mr25416515obp.96.1373399493058; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 12:51:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkey-bot.int.fusionio.com ([209.117.142.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id r4sm40501834oem.3.2013.07.09.12.51.31 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Jul 2013 12:51:32 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Warner Losh Subject: Re: libutil in Debian Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:51:30 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20130709113553.GP67810@FreeBSD.org> <20130709165939.GP91021@kib.kiev.ua> <0657575A-BF3A-486F-9582-C01E0FD97E38@bsdimp.com> <51DC4712.20707@coosemans.org> <6E057FD0-9054-44CD-A806-3AFD8A7196CC@bsdimp.com> To: Peter Wemm X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkUd9/WZ2COgudbpQ/EiqpAXzeQ0Crx1beL7NP28uZhPeIwBK3eiwK8UwEL/U/WQrJSEytN Cc: Konstantin Belousov , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Tijl Coosemans , Gleb Smirnoff , Robert Millan X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 19:51:39 -0000 On Jul 9, 2013, at 1:10 PM, Peter Wemm wrote: > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Warner Losh wrote: >> On Jul 9, 2013, at 11:34 AM, Peter Wemm wrote: > [..] >>> While we could change the DT_SONAME, I don't see a way around = "-lutil" >>> without a lot of pain on our end. >>=20 >> We would continue to install libutil.*, so that solves all these = problems. We'd just provide a compatibility thing that allows one to = link with -lbsduitl also. >=20 > No, it'd have to be the other way around I think. We *need* -lutil to > work forever. It was hard enough getting people to look in there in > the first place and now there's a ton of released tarballs with it > baked in. It's been hard enough to get people to fix freebsd-1* vs > freebsd-1.* in autoconf. >=20 > The DT_SONAME would solve a runtime ld-elf.so.1 compatability problem > if glibc happens to name its libutil.so.N the same as ours. However I > don't remember glibc using the same numbering conventions as us (they > seem to like major.minor.micro while we have major only.. if I recall > correctly) so even that shouldn't be an issue. I'm not proposing we change what we're doing today, apart from adding a = new name. >> I'm not sure that a symlink would actually work, but if it does, = that's an easy way around the problem. >=20 > To be clear, *we* don't have a problem with the status quo. The > change breaks a bunch of stuff and I'm not sure what we gain from it. >=20 > What does glibc put in its libutil? Is it meant to be a bsdish-libutil > compatability API? or something completely different? How did this > even happen in the first place? I'd like to understand what exactly > it is we're being asked to work around.. >=20 > For example, if glibc ships a bsd-ish subset of libutil and we rename > ours to something other than libutil, then wouldn't that make us > incompatible with the convention we started and glibc picked up? I'm not proposing a rename as a way to address this. Warner > --=20 > Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; = KI6FJV > UTF-8: So you can \342\200\231 .. for when a ' just won't do