jhb at FreeBSD.org
Wed Sep 21 14:37:54 PDT 2005
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 04:57 pm, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> 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.
Yeah, it's a sucky problem, which is part of why I think just bumping
everything all the time is not an optimal solution. :)
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
More information about the freebsd-current