Re: No libc shared lib number bump ?

Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> Quoting Daniel Eischen <deischen_at_freebsd.org> (Fri, 9 Nov 2007 09:54:46 -0500 (EST)):
> 
>> On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>
>>> Quoting Daniel Eischen <deischen_at_freebsd.org> (Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:43:46 -0400 (EDT)):
>>>
>>>> (*) libc and other symbol versioned libraries may be bumped
>>>> again in 8.0 to reset the numbering scheme back to 0 (libc.so.0).
>>>> It was deemed to late in the game to do this for 7.0.
>>> I'm curious, why do we need to reset it back to .0?
>> We don't have to.  It would just make things clearer to have all
>> versioned symbol libraries with the same version number since
>> they shouldn't ever have to be bumped again.  Solaris has all
>> their libraries at .1.  We've already used .1, but .0 has never
>> been used.  obrien suggested it, and it seems to make sense
>> to me.
> 
> So it's just "cosmetics"...
> 
> Do we lose much if we don't do this?
> 
> What we gain in not doing is, is that users of those libs don't have to
> recompile all ports. Compared to the number of FreeBSD installations in
> total the number of affected users are small, but those are the users
> which help us debug -current (and ideally "all" (sort of)
> src-committers). I think those people have more interesting things to
> do than to recompile everything.
> 
> Developers which link to those libs are not affected at all if we keep
> the current numbers, as they normally don't use it. It may or may not
> affect autoconf stuff which checks based upon the number instead of a
> feature/_FreeBSD_version or uname -r. Do you have an idea how much
> ports may be affected by this? I assume you will coordinate with
> portmgr to give this change a try on an experimental ports build.
> 
> While I would be happy to not have to recompile all my ports on the
> systems (3 machines, 12 jails) where I use -current, this is not an
> objection, just some food for thoughts.

I'm pretty sure there will be future version bumps despite the assurances of
the "symbol versioning cabal" that there won't be.
So I think it should be left at 7 to allow that to happen in the future.


> 
> Bye,
> Alexander.
>