From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 1 01:51:14 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 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 D469F16A422 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 01:51:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 582AF43D48 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 01:51:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D10FC46C88; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:51:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 01:53:06 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Sean McNeil In-Reply-To: <7B0411F5-FCBC-40BC-94CA-2B8AA13FA783@mcneil.com> Message-ID: <20060201014800.E95776@fledge.watson.org> References: <1138476952.86610.1.camel@triton.mcneil.com> <20060131235035.B95776@fledge.watson.org> <7B0411F5-FCBC-40BC-94CA-2B8AA13FA783@mcneil.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MFC of bump in libcom_err.so another mistake? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 01:51:15 -0000 On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Sean McNeil wrote: > On Jan 31, 2006, at 3:52 PM, Robert Watson wrote: > >> On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Sean McNeil wrote: >> >>> I was wondering if this was on purpose. Seems like there is no good >>> reason that it was done on -STABLE and it has really messed up everything >>> here for me. >>> >>> libcom_err.so.2 bumped to libcom_err.so.3. >> >> It was on purpose, but not necessarily for a good reason. Could you be >> more specific about "really messed up everything here for me", which sounds >> a lot to me like "and all hell broken loose"? I assume there's some sort >> of library and application versioning problem, but some details would be >> helpful. > > I had several big packages that depended on kerberos and they all broke > because: > > 1) libcom_err.so.2.1 was moved to /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg/ > 2) The symlink libcom_err.so.2 was removed and nothing was placed in compat. > > I finally got smart and just added an entry to libmap.conf and so I'm not > "really messed up...". That was not accurate in the first place :) So the real problem was that libcom_err.so.2 was not placed in compat when the version number was bumped. >> In principle, other than potentially requiring compat libs to run old >> binaries even though that may not strictly have been necessary, it seems >> likely that a binary depending on the old libcom_err depends also on an old >> libc. On the other hand, I consider library version number interactions to >> be mysterious, and likely have missed the point. :-) > > The point I am making is that this is in the -STABLE tree, not the -CURRENT > tree. There is no bump of libc and I don't see any reason for the > libcom_err.so revision bump in -STABLE. IMHO, it didn't make sense. There was a bump in libc, it just happened much earlier. The remainder of the libraries were bumped shortly before 6.0-RELEASE, but not after the release once it became -STABLE. Libraries also have ABI dependencies on other library revisions -- i.e., if an API changes in libc, and libypclnt depends on the old version of the API, it needs to use the old libc. Could you grab a libcom_err.so.2 from RELENG_5 and stick it in your compat tree and see what happens? Robert N M Watson