This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix missing __sqrtl_finite symbol in libm on sparc 32-bit.
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
- Cc: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>, <schwab at suse dot de>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:44:09 +0000
- Subject: Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix missing __sqrtl_finite symbol in libm on sparc 32-bit.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160124 dot 211545 dot 53854406887189856 dot davem at davemloft dot net> <mvma8nukmdo dot fsf at hawking dot suse dot de> <20160125 dot 095359 dot 436045631044019354 dot davem at davemloft dot net> <20160125 dot 100212 dot 2069742364972461739 dot davem at davemloft dot net> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1601251803070 dot 10557 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <87io2hsa1o dot fsf at mid dot deneb dot enyo dot de>
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Joseph Myers:
> > On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, David Miller wrote:
> >> >> You cannot change the ABI after the release.
> >> >
> >> > So do I have to add it to the current GLIBC version?
> >> And the reason I am asking this is because this symbol is missing
> >> from previous
> >> GLIBC versions and just as I noticed when running the testsuite, probably
> >> prevents successful linking of some applications.
> >> What if I want to add this symbol in a backport?
> > Then your backport needs to add the GLIBC_2.23 symbol version (for older
> > versions, that includes updating Versions.def, as new versions were less
> > automatic than they are now). That works fine, from experience.
> It breaks the RPM dependency generator, unless you add *all*
> GLIBC_2.23 symbols. Probably not relevant to sparc, but for other
> architectures, it's something to keep in mind.
When I say it works, I mean (a) the glibc with the backport builds OK and
passes its tests, and (b) binaries linked with that glibc that don't use
the new symbols work fine with glibc of the same version without the
backport, while binaries linked with it that do use the new symbols work
fine with the glibc version (2.23 in this case) that introduced them
I don't think such a backport introducing new symbols should go on any
official glibc release branch, however.
Joseph S. Myers