HEADS UP: compat6x
John Baldwin
jhb at freebsd.org
Tue Dec 5 14:31:35 PST 2006
On Sunday 03 December 2006 09:58, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> > John Hay wrote:
> >> But even in all those other threads, never had there been a decent
> >> answer why it is good to have two incompatible libraries with the same
> >> number. It can only cause hurt.
> >
> > No one has said that it won't be changed, only that it won't be
> > changed right this minute. It's ok if you don't understand all the
> > technical points that were made in the previous threads (I don't
> > understand them all either). But what you should realize is that this
> > is -current, and sometimes stuff breaks. If you can't deal with that,
> > run RELENG_6. Sorry to be so direct about it, but seriously ...
>
> And we're going to enable symbol versioning which also
> requires all libraries to have their version bumped
> regardless. Once we have symbol versioning, we will
> not have to bump library versions again (at least
> in the libraries that are symbol versioned - libc,
> libm, libthr, libptthread).
Yes, but it doesn't hurt to just bump things now. I actually agree with
John's argument that it is beneficial to allow folks on current to safely
use -stable apps by doing the library bump at first breakage. Granted, after
7.0 that policy will be obsolete, but it is still relevant for 7-current. :)
Heck, why not just enable symbol versioning in current by default now
anyways?
--
John Baldwin
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list