Re: MFC of bump in libcom_err.so another mistake?

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Sean McNeil wrote:

> On Jan 31, 2006, at 6:25 PM, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Sean McNeil wrote:
>>> 
>>> The point I am making is that this is in the -STABLE tree, not the -
>>> CURRENT tree.  There is no bump of libc and I don't see any reason
>>> for the libcom_err.so revision bump in -STABLE.  IMHO, it didn't make
>>> sense.
>> 
>> I don't think it was -stable at the time.  It was probably
>> 6.0-current and the version bump occurred just before the
>> release.  As a -current user, you are expected to be able
>> to deal with this and rebuild all your ports if necessary.
>
> This is EXACTLY what I am saying.  I am not a -current user, I am a -stable 
> user and this happened about a week ago or so.  It was libcom_err.so.2.1 
> until just recently.

----------------------------
revision 1.3
date: 2005/07/22 17:18:58;  author: kensmith;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
Bump the shared library version number of all libraries that have not
been bumped since RELENG_5.

Reviewed by:    ru
Approved by:    re (not needed for commit check but in principle...)
----------------------------

The commit was made last year, but I'm guessing something changed last week in 
your local tree.  The real question is what.  Did you run any tools intended 
to sweep aside old or unused libraries?  Did you upgrade across branches?  Do 
you know about what date RELENG_6 you were running before/after your upgrade?

Robert N M Watson