FreeBSD 4.11 binary compatibility (libm.so.2, etc)

[Jonathan Horne]

On Tuesday 28 August 2007 17:35:55 Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 03:31:25PM -0700, Thomas D. Dean wrote:
> > It provides a temporary solution in some cases, when you need to get
> > going.  It is not a long term solution.
>
> It's bogus because a) the real solution exists and is trivial (install
> the relevant compat port), and b) your advice *will* break
> applications.
>
> Shared library revision numbers are bumped for a good reason, of
> course, namely because there are changes made that break backwards
> compatibility.
>
> Kris
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

it would be interesting to know what kinds of apps break from doing this... i 
link 6 things to get my netbackup agent working, and so far everything works 
like clockwork.

i remember back in tredhat fedora, i learned this behavior because i want to 
remember, that tons of libs were always linked by default.  once i moved to 
freebsd, i really didnt think anything of it, because i was always told that 
these types of things were backwards compatible, and they were symlinked 
specifically because of this (ie, it was intended by the distro provider, 
becuase some app they included was asking for an older revision of a lib).  
ive not looked at a linux in about 2 years, but i want to say it was so 
common as to be "normal" to see linked libs.

anyway... /ramble.

cheers,

-- 
Jonathan Horne
http://dfwlpiki.dfwlp.org
freebsd at dfwlp.com