> On 24 Apr 2018, at 18:21, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:01:33PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>> But we still have the capability to reject a plugin (in a well
>> defined, non-crashing way) for other reasons.
>> [...]
>> To summarize, the purpose of the compa
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:01:33PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> But we still have the capability to reject a plugin (in a well
> defined, non-crashing way) for other reasons.
> [...]
> To summarize, the purpose of the compatibility check is to guarantee
> well-defined behavior on the entr
> On 28 Mar 2018, at 17:20, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:10:36AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 26 Mar 2018, at 19:06, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
2. ODR-related
> On 20 Apr 2018, at 12:51, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:10:17AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>> There is no easy way to test if a method is there. There is, however,
>> an easy way to test if a C entry point is there in a shared library.
>> This is the diffe
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:10:17AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> There is no easy way to test if a method is there. There is, however,
> an easy way to test if a C entry point is there in a shared library.
> This is the difference between your scenario and mine. In mine, I can
> explicitly
> On 18 Apr 2018, at 17:04, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:39:05PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>> When does this kind of scenario happen? Imagine we added support for
>> loading/unloading plugins. Version 13 adds a new interface to unload
>> plugins, and a new
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:39:05PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> When does this kind of scenario happen? Imagine we added support for
> loading/unloading plugins. Version 13 adds a new interface to unload
> plugins, and a new “unloadable plugin” entry point. Therefore,
> starting with vers
> On 17 Apr 2018, at 20:11, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>
>>>
>>> On 17 Apr 2018, at 16:12, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>>>
From: Christophe de Dinechin
This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
1. It is possible for plugins to bypass vers
On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 10:12 -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> >
> > From: Christophe de Dinechin
> >
> > This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
> >
> > 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
> >(as a matter of fact, the mjpeg fa
>
> > On 17 Apr 2018, at 16:12, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> From: Christophe de Dinechin
> >>
> >> This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
> >>
> >> 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
> >> (as a matter of fact, th
> On 17 Apr 2018, at 16:12, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>
>>
>> From: Christophe de Dinechin
>>
>> This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
>>
>> 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
>> (as a matter of fact, the mjpeg fallback se
>
> From: Christophe de Dinechin
>
> This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
>
> 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
>(as a matter of fact, the mjpeg fallback sets a bad example)
>
> 2. The current plugin version check viola
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> 3. Major.minor numbering scheme
>
> The major.minor numbering scheme initially selected makes it harder
> to fixes cases where an incompatibility was detected after release.
I'm still of the opinion that we should break ABI
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:36:06AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>
>
> > On 29 Mar 2018, at 10:05, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:54:21PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> >>> With that said, I find the current "ODR" portion of the commit log
> >>> misl
> On 29 Mar 2018, at 10:05, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:54:21PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>>> With that said, I find the current "ODR" portion of the commit log
>>> misleading, it's easy to get the impression that after this change, we
>>> won't have any
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:54:21PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> > With that said, I find the current "ODR" portion of the commit log
> > misleading, it's easy to get the impression that after this change, we
> > won't have any ODR problem anymore (this is what I initially thought!).
>
>
> On 28 Mar 2018, at 17:20, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:10:36AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 26 Mar 2018, at 19:06, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
2. ODR-related
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:10:36AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>
>
> > On 26 Mar 2018, at 19:06, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> >> 2. ODR-related problems
> >>
> >> The C++ One Definition Rule (ODR) states th
> On 26 Mar 2018, at 19:06, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>> 2. ODR-related problems
>>
>> The C++ One Definition Rule (ODR) states that all translation units
>> must see the same definitions. In the current code, when we
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> 2. ODR-related problems
>
> The C++ One Definition Rule (ODR) states that all translation units
> must see the same definitions. In the current code, when we call
> Agent::PluginVersionIsCompatible from the plugin, it is an
On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 16:57 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> > On 23 Mar 2018, at 14:53, Lukáš Hrázký wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 13:05 +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> > > From: Christophe de Dinechin
> > >
> > > This change addresses three issues related to plugin version
> On 23 Mar 2018, at 16:49, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>
>>
>> From: Christophe de Dinechin
>>
>> This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
>>
>> 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
>> (as a matter of fact, the mjpeg fallback se
> On 23 Mar 2018, at 14:53, Lukáš Hrázký wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 13:05 +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>> From: Christophe de Dinechin
>>
>> This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
>>
>> 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or
On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:50 -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 13:05 +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> > > From: Christophe de Dinechin
> > >
> > > This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
> > >
> > > 1. It is possible for plugins to b
>
> On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 13:05 +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> > From: Christophe de Dinechin
> >
> > This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
> >
> > 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
> >(as a matter of fact, the m
>
> From: Christophe de Dinechin
>
> This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
>
> 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
>(as a matter of fact, the mjpeg fallback sets a bad example)
>
> 2. The current plugin version check viol
On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 13:05 +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> From: Christophe de Dinechin
>
> This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
>
> 1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
>(as a matter of fact, the mjpeg fallback set
From: Christophe de Dinechin
This change addresses three issues related to plugin version checking:
1. It is possible for plugins to bypass version checking or do it wrong
(as a matter of fact, the mjpeg fallback sets a bad example)
2. The current plugin version check violates the C++ ODR, i
28 matches
Mail list logo
