Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Mar 1995 11:53:28 -0800
From:      David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
To:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: shared library versioning 
Message-ID:  <199503261953.LAA00456@corbin.Root.COM>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 27 Mar 95 05:45:16 %2B1000." <199503261945.FAA29708@godzilla.zeta.org.au> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>The recent change to the msync() interface strictly requires incrementing
>>>the major number of libc.so.
>
>>   I don't agree. The library itself should remain unchanged. Things would be
>>different if I had added a new syscall...but that's not what happend - I just
>>added an additional argument, and libc doesn't know about how many arguments a
>>syscall has.
>
>Yes, this problem can't be solved in the library.  A new syscall is required.
>Old callers don't supply the additional arg.

   In other cases this would be true...but msync has never worked correctly in
FreeBSD - it always returned EINVAL because of bugs in it. I just fixed this a
few days ago. In the current scheme, passing garbage to msync() for the flags
will be no worse than the previous behavior. I suggest we just leave it alone
unless you have some other reason to bump the libc major number.

-DG



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199503261953.LAA00456>