kris at obsecurity.org
Wed Sep 21 13:57:38 PDT 2005
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 04:45:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 September 2005 02:55 pm, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > I don't think anyone thinks that. But I prefer the old way. If we're
> > not properly keeping track of our ABI changes and what they affect,
> > then let's work on that problem. Symbol versioning isn't going to
> > solve that for us anyways.
> Yes, symbol versioning requires the same level of discipline as the more
> constrained library version number bumping. If we have decided that our
> developers are too incompetent to properly bump library versions for ABI
> changes then they are also too incompetent to handle symbol versioning.
> Furthermore, even with the massive library bumps, we have still stuck our
> collective heads in the sand and ignored all the port library version
> numbers. In theory they should all be bumped for 5 -> 6 as well.
Which is impossible to do since it's a 1-dimensional space and the
upstream vendors are likely to bump their version next week anyway.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20050921/6ab8609d/attachment.bin
More information about the freebsd-current