From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Tue Jan 12 19:18:44 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E3444E37AD for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 19:18:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markjdb@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qk1-x731.google.com (mail-qk1-x731.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::731]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DFgNN1b12z4Y8Y; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 19:18:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markjdb@gmail.com) Received: by mail-qk1-x731.google.com with SMTP id 186so2938990qkj.3; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 11:18:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=tHFXbiHNk0mFX2+EYXEF2Cc3IHjfuOqQYS1pPK8Z1Zo=; b=S++TCFzA66AZfQPC+Nd9eptIXztJ+boGNmeUPXEw1UnqV3ElAXjLDOSK9tu7FafTNA f1vEURk00mLhlhvspM+xkzg627LylrhMp1B7SJwkEl4sWdaOv9n23xf06UWTL3LZWVIU 37ktsf5RkAf4/OJgNycZVnjkk2/W7RPMk5Vq4RZkIxHlaYnK/+sNM7T/4twEei1NAMZL EVKcKFWmLGJZ7WkPFoCmvQacmKenYw3W45KXJoJ0mNWqv1Tb131y/P8XdBOevUbX30zf sqc+gwlI7wkS9SXzUxg0oZu69Iw8xuCC2b5HMve7cxyPYke+JcAjYqxZSfixf86Qi3Uv lXMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=tHFXbiHNk0mFX2+EYXEF2Cc3IHjfuOqQYS1pPK8Z1Zo=; b=WHGlA38LFbGJUzaqTo3RPtwieChReLYFdlBHAa2WiljCNAoAYjWGmoeTm6a07IQnEG h9Isx5nTjHjrhIrFSp6YhX2xkpy7x/NTleD2Ex2cuI0WSNB6RJMQJxjbQg+Yn43+fp7u uXKTc9ZaGrI428p36v0VJ5sTupNp05t3VZyXs8Vw0WvM2pOScUA9OtVp/1vgKK0XXTjv e8ol5cVGwg7PB3prEIyZDvarXOZFHYaHcmsLq5YRYIj5o2iqnMlV/abAquIn3FIkGn+R oVP8om79AKek88pLlIQi1y4sRD98eB5F/7i00xVFGWIZxnR1ChcH10CtYdcard3ZgBnc JQlQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53040nEKDxvIOWwJcarb6BStiKLR8Wnjkz/67VsjDGkBNP1ky4St rAXK9ne0FZJVqry3hdELNV4+MDPZKRh4og== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyYhLfKTF2gCfjB1hBLj4pyfu49iCSr9xWCQMFnx8nPxqaHOMz5C/60slMC8gP+9gV2t4k4Qw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:140c:: with SMTP id d12mr919880qkj.340.1610479122757; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 11:18:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from raichu ([142.126.164.150]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q70sm1853782qka.107.2021.01.12.11.18.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 12 Jan 2021 11:18:41 -0800 (PST) Sender: Mark Johnston Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:18:39 -0500 From: Mark Johnston To: Kristof Provost Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libifconfig non-private in 13? Message-ID: References: <1EB6D7ED-F370-42EA-AC66-93D8BC96F29C@FreeBSD.org> <51DB9AE6-66F8-43A8-8B47-07E3441CBC29@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <51DB9AE6-66F8-43A8-8B47-07E3441CBC29@FreeBSD.org> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4DFgNN1b12z4Y8Y X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 19:18:44 -0000 On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 07:50:45PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 12 Jan 2021, at 18:36, Mark Johnston wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 09:02:00PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Libifconfig was marked as private (and experimental) back in 2016. > >> It’s since made some strides and has grown a few users. Ifconfig > >> now > >> depends on it as well. > >> > >> While it’s far from finished it’d be more useful for some users > >> if > >> it were public. That would at least imply some level of API/ABI > >> stability, which is why I’m bringing it up here before pulling the > >> trigger. > >> > >> Does anyone see any reasons to not do this? > > > > I note that libifconfig doesn't version its symbols. In other words, > > compatibility-breaking changes generally require a shlib version bump, > > which will be painful for out-of-tree consumers (and if we don't > > expect > > to have such consumers there's no reason to make it a public library). > > Symbol versioning isn't perfect but makes some kinds of breaking > > changes > > easier to handle, and might be worthwhile here since I'd expect > > libifconfig to keep evolving for a while. Should we add a symbol map > > ahead of making libifconfig public? > > Yes, we should to that, as well as write up a man page for the current > API. > I did make a start on the man page a while back, but spare time has been > hard to come by. I posted a review to add a symbol map at least: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D28119