Distributions still suffering from s390 ABI change problems.

[Siddhesh Poyarekar]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:48:33AM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> Fundamentally this is not our decision to make. Andreas Krebbel is the
> machine maintainer and has the final say on when and how the ABI should
> be changed for s390.

Agreed, although we as distribution maintainers would have to work
with or around whatever is decided.

> Given that the damage is done in 2.19, backing it out now is not a good
> idea. We just have to move forward. I would not condone reverting the
> changes given that 2.19 is already out the door.

Why not?  What is it about the change that is non-reversible?  2.19 is
broken and nothing we do can reverse that.  That's no reason to not
reverse the breakage if possible and introduce whatever feature is
required in 2.21 with more thought given to ABI compatibility.

> We should:
> 
> * Fix the pthread issues.
> * Work to provide tooling warnings for future ABI issues.

The upstream-tracker ABI reports would have pointed this out, but they
currently only do runs for x86_64 and i686[1].  Maybe we should look
at extending that coverage somehow.

Siddhesh

[1] https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.19#ABI_Compatibility_Status
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20140715/8723591e/attachment.sig>