Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:48:44 -0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>, Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, John Indra <john@office.naver.co.id>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patch for FILE problems (was Re: -CURRENT is bad for me...) Message-ID: <200102130148.f1D1miU56714@mobile.wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <xzplmrbmk94.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> writes:
> > I've had problems in the past going backwards on major versions of
> > shared libaries. The major problem is that if I have binaries that
> > refer to libc.so.503, then when the major number is reverted back to
> > 5, it is a nop because ld will use libc.so.503 for new binaries.
>
> When we back down to 5, we add magic to the Makefiles to move
> libc.so.5?? to /usr/lib/compat - that way they're only used when
> needed at runtime, not for linking new programs.
We dont do that right now, but probably should. Remember, it is the
symlink that is magic, not the version number. /usr/lib/libc.so.503
would never get linked against if installworld reset the current version
to libc.so.5.
Asthetically we should clean out the old stuff there though. If we install
libc.so.5, we should move libc.so.{N!=5} to /usr/lib/compat. I am sure
somebody could do some make magic for it, but it is utterly not required
for any reason other than asthetics.
Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102130148.f1D1miU56714>