From owner-freebsd-current Mon Mar 27 13:47:27 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id NAA10641 for current-outgoing; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 13:47:27 -0800 Received: from trout.sri.MT.net (trout.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.12]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA10607; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 13:47:09 -0800 Received: (from nate@localhost) by trout.sri.MT.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) id OAA03534; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 14:51:20 -0700 Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 14:51:20 -0700 From: Nate Williams Message-Id: <199503272151.OAA03534@trout.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" "Re: shared library versioning" (Mar 27, 1:37pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Garrett Wollman Subject: Re: shared library versioning Cc: Paul Richards , bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans), davidg@Root.COM, current@FreeBSD.org Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > I didn't see a bump, but as a result of this change, it should be. > > So instead of said binaries failing catastrophically on a link > error, they just fail to find the library in question and fail > catastrophically on a missing library? > > I somehow fail to see the point. If we don't bump the shlib #, any binaries that are linked against the new library will think libc.so.2.0 is adequate. Which means IF that binary is moved to a machine that contains a *real* (2.0R) libc.so.2.0 it will fail at runtime because of a missing symbol. The binaries obviously link fine since they are linked against a library that contains all of the necessary symbols. But, libc.so.2.0 to the rest of the world (especially consider the change I made earlier) do not contain the strhash() routines. Programs linked against libc.so.2.0 will run with libc.so.2.1 since the run-time loader will use any minor library >= the original version, but not a minor number less than it was linked against. Clear as mud? Nate