This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Distributions still suffering from s390 ABI change problems.
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>, carlos at redhat dot com
- Cc: krebbel at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com, roland at hack dot frob dot com, aurelien at aurel32 dot net, siddhesh at redhat dot com, allan at archlinux dot org, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 15:21:04 -0600
- Subject: Re: Distributions still suffering from s390 ABI change problems.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <53C43A5E dot 9020304 at redhat dot com> <20140714 dot 132444 dot 140785163900092398 dot davem at davemloft dot net> <53C440FF dot 3010308 at redhat dot com> <20140714 dot 140948 dot 808129071568411651 dot davem at davemloft dot net>
On 07/14/14 15:09, David Miller wrote:
As you have already stated, we're already in a pickle because the ABI
change has been deployed as libc.so.6
So at this point, such a cure may already be worse than the disease.
Very likely. Numerous folks have made it very clear that a .soname bump
in the libstdc++ would effectively mean the end of the world. It's safe
to assume that a soname bump in glibc would be even worse.
Therefore, on the negative side, we might be stuck with this. But, on
the positive side, we can refer to this incident next time a similar
incident arises. We now know exactly what the ramifications are for
not handling this properly.
Right. This is a shining example of the problems in this space.
Either the ABI has to be stable or the soname has to bump, with insane
amount of pain that entails for the end users. Breaking the ABI without
the soname bump is the worst of both worlds.
jeff