This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] change GLIBC PPC64/ELF2 ABI default to 2.17
- From: Adam Conrad <adconrad at 0c3 dot net>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, munroesj at us dot ibm dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Adhemerval Zanella <azanella at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 12:39:47 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] change GLIBC PPC64/ELF2 ABI default to 2.17
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1391008726 dot 16702 dot 105 dot camel at spokane1 dot rchland dot ibm dot com> <52E92E7C dot 1040707 at redhat dot com> <20140129172158 dot GT15976 at 0c3 dot net> <52E94FDF dot 9020003 at redhat dot com>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:00:47PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> Either way, this situation is going to be painful. But I believe
> resetting the symbols to a 2.17 base will ultimately make the
> ppc64-le port more accessable to a wider developer audience.
I believe that RedHat versioning their symbols to match what's
currently upstream would ultimately make ppc64le more accessible
to a wider developer audience. I can make contentless statements
too.
There are two obvious solutions to your problem (re-version your
symbols, or use a newer glibc), it's not as if keeping the version
upstream unchanged makes either of those impossible, it just avoids
shafting others for you not having been involved in the public
discussion on this matter months ago.
Ultimately, this isn't about accessiblity, it's about who wants to
do work, and who should be penalised for having done work earlier
on the promise of a stable ABI.
Can we just drag our collective feet on this patch that's been
proposed days before the final freeze and stop pretending that we
can argue that "the ABI is known-malleable until a release is cut"
is equivalent to "we should change the established ABI to suit the
squeakiest wheel because we can"?
... Adam