From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 20 02:31:03 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-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 5FB8116A4B3; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 19AF543FCB; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h9K9V1E7008384;
	Mon, 20 Oct 2003 03:31:01 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 03:28:55 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20031020.032855.02430873.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: scottl@freebsd.org
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <3F92FC99.8010802@freebsd.org>
References: <3F92E129.10307@veidit.net>
	<20031019204629.GC49466@rot13.obsecurity.org>
	<3F92FC99.8010802@freebsd.org>
X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: re@freebsd.org
cc: current@freebsd.org
cc: kris@obsecurity.org
Subject: Re: __fpclassifyd problem
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:31:03 -0000

In message: <3F92FC99.8010802@freebsd.org>
            Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> writes:
: We need to resolve this before 5.2 in some fashion.  It looks like the
: easiest thing to do is bump libm.  Is this advisable?

The problem with bumping libm is that we also need, strictly speaking,
to bump all libarires that depend on libm, and that can be very ugly.
This moves the bump the major version from the trivial fix class to
something that we have to think real hard about.  In general one
cannot bump the major version of 'base' libaries like this w/o careful
thought and planning.  While we've done that in the past with libc, I
think we were wrong to do so in some classes of symbol tampering.

Warner