From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 22 03:20:00 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117EA16A421; Mon, 22 May 2006 03:20:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.ntplx.net (mail.ntplx.net [204.213.176.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C9B43D45; Mon, 22 May 2006 03:19:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.ntplx.net (8.13.6/8.13.6/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id k4M3Ju8d026311; Sun, 21 May 2006 23:19:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 23:19:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: <44711D0F.3060104@elischer.org> Message-ID: References: <4470DB4A.6020304@elischer.org> <44711D0F.3060104@elischer.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.ntplx.net) Cc: re@freebsd.org, Hajimu UMEMOTO , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Shared library version bump? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Daniel Eischen List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 03:20:00 -0000 On Sun, 21 May 2006, Julian Elischer wrote: > Daniel Eischen wrote: > >> On Sun, 21 May 2006, Julian Elischer wrote: >> >>> Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote: >>> >>>> deischen> Go ahead. Just realize though, that after 7.0 is released >>>> deischen> you will have to support any ABI from then on without version >>>> deischen> bumps (meaning, you have to keep shims for any old 7.0+ ABIs >>>> deischen> in libc). >>>> >>>> ume> Okay, I'll do. >>>> >>> >>> I assume htat EVENTUALLY we will bump numbers again when something >>> sufficiently >>> big needs to be done to the ABI. >> >> >> Symbol versioning is suppose to allow one library to support different >> ABIs, so the hope is that we will never have to bump libc's version >> number. If you change ABI, you still have to keep the old code around >> (or some sort of compatability shims) in the library. >> > yes but that could get too big a drain on resources oftetr while (trying ot > shim really old > stuff into really new stuff.) It might eventually get to a point where it > would be good > to cut and run.. You can never say never, but we need to better maintain our ABI. I believe Solaris has had one only version of libc from day one (Solaris, not the BSD-derived SunOS). I can see bumping libc version number again if, for instance, we were to move the resolver stuff into libresolv, or something like that. -- DE