This is the mail archive of the 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: [PATCH] PowerPC64 ELFv2 ABI 6/6: Bump soname version number

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 03:38:00PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> The version there is wrong - it should be GLIBC_2.19, not GLIBC_2.18, 
> since the 2.18 release did not in fact support little-endian.  But apart 
> from that, just the configure checks.

There's intent to release likely more than one distribution based on
glibc 2.18 and backported powerpc64le patches from 2.19/trunk.  If
we version @2.18 and upstream versions @2.19, we either force a nasty
ABI horizon we need to fix, or we need to carry a version patch for,
well, ever, and be gratuitously incompatible with upstream.  Neither
of those is appealing.

The FSF branch should reflect reality of what's being deployed, in
cases like this, not be used as a hammer to force others to see the
upstream view of reality.

So, while it's true that there will never be an FSF 2.18 release that
supports this platform (unless someone allows us to backport to a
point release), it causes exactly zero problems to have the base symbol
version set "too low", and is incredibly annoying to have it set too

You could version them all @2.4 and it wouldn't make a difference if
the only glibc you can install is >> 2.19 anyway.

... Adam

(Obviously, new symbols need to be versioned carefully, but the initial
"base set" for a new port is really not a fragile thing, unless you set
it too high compared to the reality of deployment in the wild)

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