Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 01:03:14 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@FreeBSD.ORG> To: michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock) Cc: jb@cimlogic.com.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Undefined symbol "___error" Message-ID: <199805140603.BAA00594@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.95.980514135349.799B-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> from Michael Hancock at "May 14, 98 01:58:16 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael Hancock said: > On Thu, 14 May 1998, John Birrell wrote: > > > No, it's "relinked" so that a program will know to use the later libc. > > The problem here is not that the libc major number needs to be bumped, > > but *all* other libraries that use errno.h need a major number bump. > > Bruce pointed this out. > > > > Bruce wants the change backed out. I haven't heard from anyone else. > > Should I bump the major number of all the shared libraries in the > > FreeBSD tree? Should I back out the change and forget about making future > > objects thread-aware? Should I do nothing? > > Rre there any other pending changes that can bundled with the major number > bump? > > We do need things to adjust for threads. > I think that we should use the new errno stuff, but should be done more seamlessly. If we don't do it now, we'll have troubles sometime in the future. -- John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, dyson@freebsd.org | it just makes you look stupid, jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig. 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?199805140603.BAA00594>