I want to hear from downstreams that want to add symbol-versioning to FreeType first, why do they need to.
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Tom Kacvinsky <tkacv...@gmail.com> wrote: > You raise a fair point. The point I was trying to make, and perhaps I > didn't make it clear enough > what I was after, is this: suppose some downstream maintainer decides to > add symbol versions. > Wouldn't it be nice if we already had that so there is no mess between how > one Linux distribution > does it versus another? Granted, there still might be a mess, but we can > mitigate the hassle. > > And, now for another idiom: that's just my two cents. > > Regards, > > Tom > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@cs.toronto.edu> > wrote: > >> I know what symbol versioning is used for (I was also package maintainer >> at Red Hat for four years). But don't see how it applies to FreeType. >> FreeType never changes ABI in backward-incompatible way. Its build system >> is already adhoc enough. I don't want to see more complexity added >> unnecessarily. Also, I don't want FreeType binaries to come with the same >> headaches that libpng and openssl cause every time they bump soname. >> >> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 4:45 AM, Tom Kacvinsky <tkacv...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'll see what I can do. To be honest, the only platforms that really >>> support this >>> are Linux and Solaris. I definitely have access to Linux machines, but >>> not a >>> Solaris machine. I might be able to get access to the latter. >>> >>> Despite all of the talk about whether symbol versioning is useful (and >>> this is not >>> meant to be snarky), keep in mind the major commercial Linux >>> distributions use >>> symbol versioning, as well as the free Linux distributions. I work for >>> SUSE and >>> my colleagues highly recommend getting symbol versioning into FreeType. >>> I >>> agree with them and am willing to do the work as I find time - as the >>> saying goes, >>> put my money where my mouth is. >>> >>> The only thing I would need is a way of getting the API functions to add >>> to a >>> symbol versioning linker file. This way, the symbol versioning script >>> doesn't >>> need to be checked in, and if we add something to the API, we don't need >>> to >>> worry about missing it in the library version file. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:25 AM, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> > Admittedly, symbol versioning is very poorly supported and >>>> > documented [...] >>>> >>>> Yes. >>>> >>>> > [...] All in all, this looks like something to stay away from. >>>> >>>> Maybe there are more knowledgeable people who want to contribute... >>>> >>>> >>>> Werner >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Freetype-devel mailing list >>> Freetype-devel@nongnu.org >>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> behdad >> http://behdad.org/ >> > > -- behdad http://behdad.org/
_______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
