This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] change GLIBC PPC64/ELF2 ABI default to 2.17
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- Cc: Adam Conrad <adconrad at 0c3 dot net>, munroesj at us dot ibm dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Adhemerval Zanella <azanella at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 14:04:00 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] change GLIBC PPC64/ELF2 ABI default to 2.17
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1391008726 dot 16702 dot 105 dot camel at spokane1 dot rchland dot ibm dot com> <52E92E7C dot 1040707 at redhat dot com> <20140129172158 dot GT15976 at 0c3 dot net> <20140129181118 dot 9F85174441 at topped-with-meat dot com> <52E953C4 dot 40503 at redhat dot com> <20140130212010 dot 8E5D974441 at topped-with-meat dot com> <52EB1CF1 dot 1010105 at redhat dot com> <20140131182424 dot F22AB74430 at topped-with-meat dot com>
On 01/31/2014 01:24 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
>> The obvious benefit from choosing an ABI baseline of 2.19 is that old compat
>> symbols are removed. This simplifies binaries and maintenance for the port
>> going forward. The problem I have with this somewhat egotistical position is
>> that it's developer centric not user centric.
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>
> The vast majority of the users, and even the vast majority of the
> experiences of the current pre-release users, are in the future. Future
> users benefit from efficient maintenance. Everyone benefits from smaller
> binaries, quicker symbol table lookups, and so forth. But the primary
> benefit is in reducing the unknown risks to future users.
OK, thanks, I believe I understand your position now.
> I really don't have anything more to say on the subject. I think Joseph is
> representing the neutral position well now. The final determination will
> be made by the active participants.
Thanks for responding to my question. I hope it didn't sound negative.
I honestly want to understand your position. You took the time to write
it up and I want to take the time to understand it.
Cheers,
Carlos.