Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 11:45:27 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, peter@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libpthread version bump Message-ID: <42693837.7090400@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20050422174209.GA97721@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20050422103141.F5855@carver.gumbysoft.com> <20050422174209.GA97721@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Kargl wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 10:33:06AM -0700, Doug White wrote: > >>I think we need to bump libpthread's version to allow for compatibility in >>6. Then we can ship the old libpthread along with the old libc and the >>Right Thing happens. > > > I certainly agree that we should bump the library if needed. > On more thought, I'm not so sure. The incompatibility arose because of a change in the kernel ABI with the fs and gs CPU selectors. Will just running the old libc and libpthread work with a new kernel that has this ABI change? We might need to create a special compat libc.so.5 that understands the new ABI and provides the appropriate functions to libpthread. What a mess; Peter's changes to the selectors was the right thing to do, but now we are left with the hard questions of compatibility. Peter? > >>As it is now people have to recompile any libpthread consumer. >> > > > A workaround may be the use of libmap.conf to map libc.so.5 > to libc.so.6. > Well, we are talking about formally ensuring that 5.x compatibility works for 6.0 when it's released. Telling users to do a hack with libmap doesn't really match what we need. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42693837.7090400>