Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 17:27:20 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: "Peter Wemm" <peter@wemm.org> Cc: threads@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Symbol versioning errors in libthr Message-ID: <86wspm0zvb.fsf@ds4.des.no> In-Reply-To: <e7db6d980802030759x6db9bf1dq8992542bd8d2e017@mail.gmail.com> (Peter Wemm's message of "Sun\, 3 Feb 2008 08\:59\:45 -0700") References: <861w7um5o5.fsf@ds4.des.no> <e7db6d980802030759x6db9bf1dq8992542bd8d2e017@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Peter Wemm" <peter@wemm.org> writes: > I'm not sure I see the point in that. Consider the not-moving-to-1.1 > case. If somebody takes an 8.0 binary and runs it on 7.x, then > they'll get a 'symbol not found' error. On the other hand, if they're > moved and somebody tries the same thing, then they still get the same > kind of 'symbol not found' error but with just one character > different. As you point out, it doesn't make much practical difference, so why not do it right? Why leave a bad example around for people who are trying to understand symbol versioning by looking at how it's done in existing libraries? DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86wspm0zvb.fsf>