From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 4 11:24:43 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03386106564A; Sun, 4 Apr 2010 11:24:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanefbsd@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A5718FC17; Sun, 4 Apr 2010 11:24:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 3so1134076qwe.7 for ; Sun, 04 Apr 2010 04:24:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=A4Z7vayfLPCfX1i0lCvR14knoAbv+70Q1j1Unlcc/6Q=; b=nPMEwz+beJkE9KKF+aD2UQD6rIir39fI9gPXAElmDGzN0s1gd+sqU8PmvUjajZjvqC 5/jHzN19v0ai28OFHPffPAtskf8YM0S0jYtYtiXfyndEz6iYnE/rTknwtLD8K2SoJm4x z48zkVjVwrwhQeEs4j02XEPeBZtOZZvmusu0Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=DLYqxPpM/VgX6MhCLBIP+PmYfB6GnQZd/JTGCWc8Vre9q/hohYVMzaVUkL+SrtxUVQ oZdcmA9E4bhkJaVG4HnVvDXmD+u1yH0rGBrsYeJBh2QlctUMHNRTbTbiD08Ua3SObFN0 c+4oQSztOwgURSuQjPoSHcG46O31oMd5K+NZE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.33.72 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Apr 2010 04:24:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4BA7E0B8.3080406@delphij.net> Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 04:24:41 -0700 Received: by 10.229.235.193 with SMTP id kh1mr7067532qcb.106.1270380281601; Sun, 04 Apr 2010 04:24:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Robert Watson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net Subject: Re: HEADSUP: zlib updated [svn commit: r205471 - in head: . lib/libz lib/libz/contrib lib/libz/doc sys/sys] 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: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 11:24:43 -0000 On 3/26/10, Robert Watson wrote: > On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Xin LI wrote: > >> A MFC of this update is planned, but we will have to make some rather >> aggressive changes against the library and more testing. >> >> Please make sure that you have at least libxml2-2.7.6_2 in your ports tree >> >> before even thinking about updating your ports tree. Older libxml2 uses >> some knowledge of zlib internals that has been changed in this update >> which >> is known to cause problem. > > While the update sounds like a good idea (as does moving to symbol > verisoning > for this library), I'm not yet convinced an MFC is a good idea given the > compatibility issues you describe. Perhaps you could clarify a bit the > failure mode: this affects only people who rebuild their ports using exactly > the same ports versions, but after having done an upgrade that includes this > update? It sounds like existing binaries will continue to work since they > will reference the old library version? Yes, but the number of libraries which need to be fixed is a pain. If you go the conservative (not ultra conservative) route, you'll have to rebuild all dependencies of graphics/png and graphics/tiff (which includes a ton of gnome apps, X, etc). Oh, and did I forget to mention that libtool hardcodes paths and versioning information? Of course most people won't see this fact until they run make delete-old-libs, but it's a doosy... This is the primary reason why Gentoo Linux has a script to clean up these [libtool] messes... That point alone is a reason for being ultra-conservative with this MFCing change. This won't affect folks building from scratch after this commit, but it'll easily kill off an afternoon or day for folks upgrading if they one isn't careful because the impact is large. Of course scripting the activity to avoid these times of base system library bumps is trivial, but my script that I whipped up still has rough edges and I'd rather not submit it quite yet... Thanks, -Garrett