From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 16 08:25:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDB5216A4CE; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 08:25:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.celabo.org (gw.celabo.org [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9681243D2D; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 08:25:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nectar@celabo.org) Received: from madman.celabo.org (madman.celabo.org [10.0.1.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "madman.celabo.org", Issuer "celabo.org CA" (not verified)) by gw.celabo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F98C54840; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:25:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id B80B46D455; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:25:21 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:25:21 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Maxime Henrion , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20040416152521.GC37115@madman.celabo.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , Maxime Henrion , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org References: <200404112136.i3BLaVxM099406@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040416122017.GB64995@tara.freenix.org> <20040416122956.GG19602@elvis.mu.org> <20040416151640.GC64995@tara.freenix.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040416151640.GC64995@tara.freenix.org> X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys mount.h src/lib/libc/gen Makefile.inc getvfsent.3 getvfsent.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:25:23 -0000 On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 05:16:40PM +0200, Ollivier Robert wrote: > According to Maxime Henrion: > > and I would actually be surprised if there was any. I already bumped > > The external ones are the problem but I agree that there are probably none. > > > __FreeBSD_version for this change and it looks sufficient to me. Can > > you explain why you think a major number bump of libc is in order here? > > Because that how you play the major number game in shared libraries world. > Anytime you change (i.e. remove a function or change a function's argument > in a way that's incompatible with the prevous one) a librabry's interface, > you MUST (in the RFC-mode sense of the world) change the major. > > I agree with Warner that it is a major pain (and why we do this only once > in a given branch) and that it this case, we can simply ignore the issue. > > :-) More to the point is that we have it backwards: we really MUST not make incompatible changes to the ABI in a given branch. Of course, we have a little wiggle room before 5.x becomes -STABLE, but it is *very little* room at this point. If removing getvfsent() would be at all likely to affect software outside the tree, then I would rather see a compatibility shim. However, Maxime has already insisted that there are no other consumers, and I choose to believe him :-) Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine / nectar@celabo.org / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@freebsd.org