Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 16:16:06 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com Cc: ataraxia@cox.net, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [PATCH] note the __sF change in src/UPDATING Message-ID: <20021108.161606.79869853.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10211081806220.10745-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> References: <20021108.142609.112624839.imp@bsdimp.com> <Pine.GSO.4.10.10211081806220.10745-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10211081806220.10745-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> writes:
: On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: > In message: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10211081205020.27766-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
: > Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> writes:
: > : All the ports are going to be rebuilt for the release anyways,
: > : so this doesn't affect fresh installs, correct? It is only a
: > : problem when mixing older 4.x and 5.0 libraries/binaries with
: > : __sF-free libc (if I understand things correctly).
: >
: > The problem is that you cannot have 4.x packages and 5.x packages
: > co-mingled on the same system. that's what I'm trying to fix. You'd
: > have to rebuild the 4.x packages before they are fixed.
:
: I don't think this is a show-stopper. Just recompile all your
: ports or use the pre-built 5.0 packages.
I disagree.
: > : This is 5.0; it is a major release and there will be some flies
: > : in the ointment. I say bite the bullet now -- don't wait.
: > : If we want to provide an optional compatability hack to libc
: > : so that folks can compile it with __sF support, then I think
: > : that is better than leaving __sF in the release, perhaps
: > : with a mktemp(3)-like warning if possible (?).
: >
: > You'd need a run-time warning for this to be effective. I'm not sure
: > that ld.so can do this right now.
:
: Could you put __sF in it's own file, and put the error in
: a .init section? We don't care about static binaries, right?
: They shouldn't have a problem.
More details please. I'd love for there to be a way to know which
binaries use __sF.
: > This is not a fly in the pointment, but rather a major incompatibility
: > that makes it impossible to have a reasonable mix.
:
: If it's really a hassle for folks, then just provide the
: optional compatability hack and make them rebuild libc.
: Or provide a pre-built version that doesn't get installed
: by default.
I'm not sure that I agree with that solution. __sF was supposed to
die in -stable around 4.3, but the ball got dropped on the floor. If
it had, then I wouldn't care so much now. I don't see it as a big
deal to have it for 5.0, but not 5.1 or 5.2 depending...
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021108.161606.79869853.imp>