Re: Patch for FILE problems (was Re: -CURRENT is bad for me...)

[Dag-Erling Smorgrav]

Warner Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've had problems in the past going backwards on major versions of
> shared libaries.  The major problem is that if I have binaries that
> refer to libc.so.503, then when the major number is reverted back to
> 5, it is a nop because ld will use libc.so.503 for new binaries.

When we back down to 5, we add magic to the Makefiles to move
libc.so.5?? to /usr/lib/compat - that way they're only used when
needed at runtime, not for linking new programs.

> What's wrong with shipping with say libc.so.505 in 5.0 and then say
> libc.so.645 in 6.0?

Umm, I dunno, except that it'll look weird, but that's just a matter
of taste.

Of course, what we really need is "mandatory minor numbers", i.e.
minor numbers that are treated as "I need this version", not as "I
need this version or newer"... *ducks* *runs*

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message