From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 24 22:21:57 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D2716A417; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:21:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 245DE13C461; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:21:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.netplex.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id l7OM3Zxr003868; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:03:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net) X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]); Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:03:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:03:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net To: Yar Tikhiy In-Reply-To: <20070824214429.GB99474@comp.chem.msu.su> Message-ID: References: <200708230509.l7N59VCi048341@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070824183630.GA99474@comp.chem.msu.su> <20070824214429.GB99474@comp.chem.msu.su> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen fts-compat.c fts-compat.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:21:57 -0000 On Sat, 25 Aug 2007, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:14:53PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > >> this way: if there wasn't symbol versioning and libc was >> already bumped, how would you solve the problem? You >> wouldn't bump libc again, right? > > I've believed that symbol versioning should help us to fix bugs, not > prevent us from doing so. Not having to bump the libc version each > time was the main reason to have symbol versioning, wasn't it? The version defs and symbol versioning are for releases, and not meant for use to solve -current upgrade problems. You wouldn't see Sun bump their public version definitions to work around interim ABI changes in their development tree. We will always have issues like this for those running and developing in -current, and we shouldn't be using public version definitions to work around our own internal build problems. -- DE