binary incompatible change in libnss_*.so.2
Thorsten Kukuk
kukuk@suse.de
Tue Apr 9 19:32:00 GMT 2002
On Tue, Apr 09, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:18:15PM +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 09:21, Bruno Haible wrote:
> > >
> > > > After installing glibc-20020408 (built with gcc-3.0.4, on a SuSE 7.3 i386
> > > > system) "su" and "login" don't work any more, because dynamic loading of
> > > > /lib/security/pam_unix.so fails. The reason are unsatisfied symbols.
> > > > Last time, with glibc-20020115, there was no problem.
> > >
> > > The PAM module is using a NSS module directly which isn't allowed. The
> > > NSS modules don't provide a user ABI, only the nSS routines in libc are
> > > allowed to use them.
> >
> > Why do we have a major version number for it and increased it in the
> > past for binary incopatible changes?
>
> Did we bump libc.so version number any time some exported, though
> considered private, function changed (I mean here all the symbols now
> marked as GLIBC_PRIVATE, those were changing in the past
> even between dot releases)?
No, but we did it for libnss in the past.
> > The reason (you self explained it!) is,
> > that in this way it is possible to link against this libraries. Why
> > did you change your opinium about this?
>
> Cannot find any such explanation above.
Uli explained it to me 3 years ago in a private email, when we
discussed some compatiblity problems with some changes to fix
the nss interface.
Thorsten
--
Thorsten Kukuk http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/ kukuk@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG Deutschherrenstr. 15-19 D-90429 Nuernberg
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Key fingerprint = A368 676B 5E1B 3E46 CFCE 2D97 F8FD 4E23 56C6 FB4B
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list