This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] change GLIBC PPC64/ELF2 ABI default to 2.17


On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 15:11 +0100, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> On 01/29/2014 04:18 PM, Steven Munroe wrote:
> > Starting a new platform is always more complicated then we would like
> > and we often find examples where the needs of the larger Linux community
> > trumps our initial assumptions.
> > 
> > Each distribution decides how it will support a new platform and we have
> > requests to allow for back-ports of PPC64LE ELF2 to a GLIBC-2.17. 
> > 
> > To support the larger Linux community we need to insure forward
> > compatibility across releases, and this implies setting the GLIBC
> > powerpc.*le-.*-linux.* default back 2.17.
> > 
> > We are not asking to apply this patch retroactively to the GLIBC-2.17
> > source. But we like to get this patch accepted upstream to serve notice
> > to all involved (in PPC64LE) that GLIBC-2.17 is the oldest symbol set,
> > and promise this it final word on the topic.
> > 
> > We also ask that all distributions apply this patch and ELF2 ABI patches
> > if they planing to support the PPC64LE platform and doing a back port of
> > the to GLIBC-2.17 or 2.18.
> 
> I'm really surprised by this change at this point of time.
> 
We are starting a new platform and building a new community around this
new platform. The good news is the community is growing, but each new
distro has it own set of policies and existing assumption.

We are just trying to be inclusive. And it is not just about one distro.

> Since there are apparently backported 2.17 and 2.18 versions out there,
> let me ask a different question: Which ABI will be the one that you
> promise stability for?
> 
The GLIBC 2.19 will be the 2.19 ABI and the GLIBC-2.17 will be the 2.17
ABI. We want to insure that PPC64LE ELF2 binary build on GLIBC-2.17 will
run on a 2.18 or 2.19 or later GLIBC. We do not expect a binary build on
2.19 will run on GLIBC 2.18 or 2.17. But this the normal definition.

> My expectation is that the official glibc 2.19 release to be the
> reference version and if there are any incompatibilities between the
> backports and the glibc 2.19 release, the backports need to be fixed.
> 
yes the 2.18 and 2.17 back ports must have forward compatible with
GLIBC-2.19, which the normal requirement. I and not asking for change to
the GLIBC-2.19 ABI. I am asking to change the GLIBC DEFAULT symbol for
the new PPC64LE platform to be 2.17.

> Can we all agree on using glibc 2.19 as the reference for ABI stabilitiy?
> 
I agree. Adam, Carlos?

> I'd like to see a signoff from the power maintainers on this one,
> 
That would be Adhemerval and Myself.

> Andreas


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]