5.2 compatibility with 5.1?
Jacques Vidrine
nectar at freebsd.org
Mon Dec 15 06:13:40 PST 2003
gwk at rahn-koltermann.de said the following on 12/15/03 4:18 AM:
> Hi,
>
> I installed 5.2-RC1 and wanted to run my Emacs binary from the 5.1
> system.
>
> However, 5.2-RC1 has libutil.so.4 while 5.1 had libutil.so.3. This was
> of course easy to workaround by symlinking libutil.so.3 from 5.1 into
> 5.2-RC1.
That type of hack is never recommended. If you need libutil.so.3, I
think you would be better off to get libutil.so.3 (from a 5.1
installation). Don't just pretend that libutil.so.4 is libutil.so.3.
You clearly seem to understand that different library version numbers
will have incompatible interfaces.
>
> More serious seems the following problem: Sometimes when sending Email
> from Evolution built on 5.1, running on 5.2-RC1, Evolution crashes
> with an undefined reference from libc_r:
>
> /usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: /usr/X11R6/lib/evolution/1.4/libeutil.so.0:
> Undefined symbol "gethostbyaddr_r"
>
> Indeed gethostbyaddr_r seems to be present in libc.so on 5.1, but not
> any more in 5.2-RC1.
>
> I thought minor number upgrades would have compatible libs?
> Do we need a compat51 package?
>
> If libc was modified in an incompatible way, shouldn't we bump the
> version number?
The API for 5.x will not be officially frozen until 5.3, although it
should be very rare that incompatible changes are made this late in the
game.
I removed gethostbyaddr_r as well as some other bogus *_r functions that
were not actually re-entrant. They should have never been added in the
form that they were. My intent is to add non-bogus versions before 5.3.
Cheers,
--
Jacques Vidrine NTT/Verio SME FreeBSD UNIX Heimdal
nectar at celabo.org jvidrine at verio.net nectar at freebsd.org nectar at kth.se
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list