From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Feb 15 19:34:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from green.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94DE637B401; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 19:34:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (w2a9ia@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by green.dyndns.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1G3YPA23124; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:34:25 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from green@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <200102160334.f1G3YPA23124@green.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Brian Somers Cc: Warner Losh , arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The whole libc thing. In-Reply-To: Message from Brian Somers of "Fri, 16 Feb 2001 02:25:15 GMT." <200102160225.f1G2PFw09227@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> From: "Brian F. Feldman" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:34:24 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Brian Somers wrote: > [.....] > > Step 5: > > Bump the major version of libc and start using something like > > peter's change. > > Step 5.1: > Bump the version number on all libraries that don't contain > a dependency on libc but contain __sF references. > > And I'm sure there are other horrors there... > > > For example: > > cd /usr/local/lib > for f in lib*.so.* > do > objdump -x $f | fgrep NEEDED | fgrep -q libc.so. || > nm $f | fgrep -wq __sF && echo $f > done > > Produces a list of 23 libraries (out of 54) on my laptop :-( Tell me > if I'm wrong, but I believe these libraries contain no indication of > what libc they want, but may be mucking about with stdio internals... > > I think step 5 can't happen 'till we declare declare a D-day after > which old binaries and libraries just won't work. > > I also can't think of any way to soften the blow. At the end of the > day, there are binaries out there that not only know the size of sF, > but they also play with the internals directly. Binary support of > this without some currently-unused-internal-changed-to-a-pointer > kludge is unlikely AFAICT. I change my mind. I'll keep everything in the same place but the _up. An application, even a gross one that tries to touch all inside FILE, still shouldn't be touching the most private parts of it. (Sounds so sick, doesn't it? It is.) That won't break e.g. libftpio and sendmail (bf_torek.c), at least. *sigh* Those need to be rewritten, of course, really.... -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! / green@FreeBSD.org `------------------------------' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message