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: glibc 2.27: 3 weeks till release


On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Florian Weimer wrote:

> Yes, the final part is the typical problem.  I have thought about this some
> more and I don't think we need to preserve static binary compatibility at this
> point.  In the future, when we improve static linking in general, we should
> consider relaxing the consistency checks and perhaps change the way we add new
> locale data to accommodate existing binaries.

Improving static binary compatibility would also mean ensuring the things 
that load .so modules work reliably even when the installed .so modules 
are from a newer libc version.  That's NSS, and character set conversions 
loading gconv modules, at least.

Is ld.so.cache compatibility between different glibc versions ever a 
consideration?  I decided not, when reviewing the RISC-V patches (i.e., 
there was no need to ask for 32-bit and 64-bit libraries to be identified 
separately in the cache now, even though that would be needed if in future 
Linux supports RV32I binaries on RV64I systems, because it would be OK to 
change the flag values incompatibly at that future point).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


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