Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 05:39:02 -0600 From: John E Hein <jhein@timing.com> To: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org, alfred@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen fts-compat.c fts-compat.h Message-ID: <18129.26198.138161.387852@gromit.timing.com> In-Reply-To: <20070825053302.GG99474@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <20070824215515.GF16131@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20070824220244.GH87451@elvis.mu.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0708241819220.13181@sea.ntplx.net> <20070824.172212.74696955.imp@bsdimp.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0708242252520.15344@sea.ntplx.net> <20070825053302.GG99474@comp.chem.msu.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yar Tikhiy wrote at 09:33 +0400 on Aug 25, 2007: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:08:01PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > > It should be easy to say FBSD_1.0 is RELEASE_7.0, FBBSD_1.1 is RELEASE_7.1, > > etc. The versioned symbol namespace is mostly to aid the release > > engineers. If you start to have FBSD_1.2, FBSD_1.3, and FBSD_1.4 > > are interim versions and FBSD_1.5 is release 7.1, that isn't good. > > In addition, symbol versions are mere text labels with no special > meaning to ld(1), so we can format them to allow for version changes > between major releases. By way of precedent, this reminds me of how __FreeBSD_version is used for miscellaneous intra-release changes (changes that aren't necessarily ABI changes, but perhaps disappearance or emergence of new tools or tool changes). For instance, this has been known to happen when the pkg* tools change and the ports infrastructure is tweaked to behave differently based on the fine-grained FreeBSD version (aka OSVERSION). Can the symbol versioning labels be standardized to make similar accomodations for ABI changes in between releases? Even in stable branches, now that I think about it. I almost removed that controversial thought from this email to avoid a flame war. But on the other hand, used conservatively, I could foresee a security fix being made much easier if an ABI change was allowed. This would be quite rare, I'm sure.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18129.26198.138161.387852>