This is the mail archive of the libffi-discuss@sourceware.org mailing list for the libffi 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: Soname bump


On 08/15/2011 08:09 PM, Anthony Green wrote:
> Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> writes:
> 
>> On 08/15/2011 07:35 PM, Anthony Green wrote:
>>> Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Yes, but that will mean that packages will be broken by the libffi update,
>>>> so the Fedora update mechanism will have to push new versions to hundreds
>>>> of thousands (millions?) of users.  If I change the libffi package I don't
>>>> think there's any way to confine the soname bump to ARM, even though only
>>>> ARM needs it.
>>>
>>> Andrew and I just discussed this on IRC, the result of which is that I
>>> just reversed the ABI changing fix from the git libffi repo, and will
>>> try to push out 3.0.10 this week in order to publish a Fedora 15 update.
>>>
>>> Then I'll immediately re-apply this patch to the 3.0.11 train for F16.
>>
>> and having two libffi5's with a different set of symbols?
> 
> That's not what I'm saying. libffi 3.0.10 would have the same set of
> symbols as 3.0.9 and also have the .5 so version number. 
> 
> Matthias and I just discussed this on #libffi.  He pointed out that 361
> packages in Ubuntu depend on libffi and he's been building them with the
> libffi 3.0.10 release candidates for a while.  Forcing him back to a .5
> soname means forcing a rebuild of all of those packages, so...  I'll
> make a 3.0.11 on the heals of 3.0.10 with just the debug symbol / soname
> change so that Ubuntu can pick this up and avoid a major rebuild.  I'll
> see about putting 3.0.11 into Fedora 16 as well.

thanks!  I didn't notice that the removal of the debug symbols would be reverted
too.

  Matthias


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