From owner-freebsd-current Sat Nov 25 10:44:37 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [207.154.226.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F50537B4C5 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:44:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1098) id C6FA72B259; Sat, 25 Nov 2000 12:44:34 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 12:44:34 -0600 From: Bill Fumerola To: current@freebsd.org Cc: Derek Schene' Subject: Re: libc.so.4 not found Message-ID: <20001125124434.Q14080@elvis.mu.org> References: <3A1F75E3.2E17FC43@san.rr.com> <20001125024407.O14080@elvis.mu.org> <20001125030833.A54062@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20001125030833.A54062@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@freebsd.org on Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 03:08:34AM -0800 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.2-FEARSOME-20001103 i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 03:08:34AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > In this case it doesn't matter -- "a fresh hard drive" and "local > package" implies that the -current packages on ftp.freebsd.org haven't > been built since the bump and are thus slightly out dated. Plus all 3rd party software that provides only binaries (legato, glftpd, etc). Without the compat libraries or the symlink hacks these programs have no way of running. > > I'll renew my annoyance with the fact that we just bumped this without > > even figuring out why things broke or if we could change them in a way > > to save functionality without having to bump the version number[1]. > > It doesn't matter as at least Garrett has some changes he's going to make > that aren't compatible. libc.so will be at least at version "5" in > FreeBSD 5.0, so we'll have to go thru this pain eventually anyway. Suckage. At least we'll know the reason this time. > > We also never propagated this bump to RELENG_4, so the release shipped > > with the worst of both worlds. > > Huh? Why the worst of both worlds?? Incompatible changes AND no way to differentiate between the two. (plus we don't even know what changed it, so we have no way of telling people "your libc before X won't work with binarys that use the frobozz() interface) > I'm not quite sure what isn't together other than no compat4x libc.so.4 > yet -- I can certainly create one, but I'll have to update it for the > libc.so.4 in 4.3 and 4.4. Don't forget the compat libs are uuencoded > files, so CVS will see large diffs. If people don't mind, I'll certainly > make the compat libs now. People who have binaries they can't recompile will need them. The fact that it pains our CVS tree really isn't an issue to me, I'd like to think we have software engineering that utilizes source code management, and not the other way around. -- Bill Fumerola - security yahoo / Yahoo! inc. - fumerola@yahoo-inc.com / billf@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message