Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 2 Nov 2006 16:39:56 -0500 (EST)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@freebsd.org>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: libpthread shared library version number
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.0611021636080.14802@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <454A6164.80606@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <454936CA.6060308@FreeBSD.org> <20061102115058.GB10961@rambler-co.ru> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0611020824150.12236@sea.ntplx.net> <20061102140948.GA70915@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20061102182419.GC774@rambler-co.ru> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0611021337530.13428@sea.ntplx.net> <454A6164.80606@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Maxim Sobolev wrote:

> Daniel Eischen wrote:
>>>  I think more important would be to know
>>> the plans regarding the symbol versioning in 7.0-RELEASE; if the
>>> plan is to have them versioned, then I think we should sync shlib
>>> majors bumping with this change.
>> 
>> I agree that we should do this at the same time.
>
> So far I fail to see any sensible reason for this. We can bump now and turn 
> versioning later when we are ready. Not a big deal.

It just makes for less turmoil in -current.  If you run with
libraries before symver is enabled, then if you try using
packages built on a more recent machine with symver, then
those packages won't work.  Not too big a deal, but if we
know we are going to enable symver, then why not do both at
the same time?

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0611021636080.14802>