This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils 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: RFA: gold version number

>> My general feeling is that the version number should change when there
>> is a significant change in functionality, or when the plugin API
>> changes in some way.  But it's also OK to use it for tracking, of
>> course.
> this is what i'd tend to leans towards as well.  for anyone who needs to
> check the version to determine compatibility, i'd generally expect them
> to look at the binutils version anyways ...

OK, I can go with that. I probably should have bumped it for s390 and
MIPS-64 support. (Maybe it's not too late to do it for MIPS-64, as the
last patches for that are still about to land.)

The plugin API has its own version number; it reports the linker
version number only for logging/diagnostic purposes. (Plus, it was
designed so as to rarely need a version number change. New features
are added simply by allocating new LDPT values, keeping all existing
ones exactly the same as before, kind of like Unix system call

Thanks for the advice!


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