On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:27:09AM -0400, Brian White wrote: > > > What confuses me is why libc6 would make a change like that in a "minor" > > > revision (as indicated by the version number of the package). I would > > > have expected the glibc guys to only redefine functions during the > > > change of the "medium" or "major" revision numbers. > > > > Minor releases they only require backwards compatibility, not forwards. > > "Medium" releases are huge. The "Major" revision is reserved for > > something which will require a global change of soname - which they > > have no intention of allowing. > > And that answers my original question. The libc6 "definition" of the > "medium" and "minor" revision numbers are different than what I had > expected them to mean. Thank you! > > Out of curiosity, would a "medium" change retain any amout of backward > compatibility?
Actually, medium releases also retain _complete_ binary compatibility. They're just a little more pronounced. Glibc has no intention of breaking binary compat without bumping soname, and no intention of bumping soname. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
