Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 11:13:23 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: libutil in Debian Message-ID: <0657575A-BF3A-486F-9582-C01E0FD97E38@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20130709165939.GP91021@kib.kiev.ua> References: <CAOfDtXN2fWQAyGNb_ifH9y=zHO%2BGGnSdWnD8C6BzWDTU_7rWFQ@mail.gmail.com> <20130709113553.GP67810@FreeBSD.org> <CAOfDtXOTqzF9=s%2BUv6%2BMoAu0nrmyGrxJz4xaSJYEfDzRvrKx8g@mail.gmail.com> <20130709165939.GP91021@kib.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jul 9, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 05:05:00PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >> Hi Gleb, >>=20 >> 2013/7/9 Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>: >>> With all respect to GNU and Debian the libutil in BSD appeared in = 1988, >>> and the fact that GNU has taken that name in 1996 isn't reason for = BSD >>> to change name. >>=20 >> Thanks for pointing this out. >>=20 >> Please note that my request is only based on practical grounds. It >> shouldn't be interpreted as implying endorsement on Glibc's use of >> libutil name. >>=20 >> Historically, Glibc maintainer has been very difficult to deal with. >> This has affected non-Linux ports of Glibc as well. In contrast, >> FreeBSD community may or may not agree with proposals but is at least >> open to discuss things. This (rather than "fairness") is the reason I >> try to work things out here and not there. >>=20 >> Please take it as a compliment rather than as offence :-) >>=20 >>> Also, FreeBSD is just one of the BSD descendants, and all of them = share >>> the libutil. >>=20 >> So, I take it that the change I'm proposing could have disruptive = effects. >>=20 >> I do think there are long-term advantages for FreeBSD and the other >> BSD descendants in making it easy for their APIs to be deployed >> elsewhere. I mean, in terms of portability. >>=20 >> However I'm clearly biased so I'd rather not insist on this. I leave >> it for you to judge. >=20 > Renaming the libutil would break the ABI of the base system. > If you are introducing new interfaces to the other systems, you > can use a library name you find suitable. But for the library > which is linked with significant number of existing binaries, > rename is not an easy option. Can we use libmap.conf to create an alias for the new name on FreeBSD so = that programs that link against libbsdutil, to pick an arbitrary name, = can work and libbsdutil can be packaged for debian? This will allow = things to be portable, while allowing repackaging by Debian. Warner=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0657575A-BF3A-486F-9582-C01E0FD97E38>