Derrick J Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I expect symbol versioning to do what symbol versioning does, namely to >> provide a mechanism for maintaining a stable ABI even when introducing >> new function signatures so that the library ABI doesn't have to be >> changed unnecessarily and so that the SONAME can remain fairly stable. >> A stable SONAME is important for packaging to avoid unnecessary shared >> library transitions and backward compatibility issues when building >> related programs. There are lots of web pages out there about what >> symbol versioning is used for; I want it for all of the standard >> reasons. > The soname should be what it always is: a name. When you add stuff, bump > the minor so version. When you change stuff, bump the major version. Of > course, the tools don't actually necessarily work right when you do > this, but there's no excuse for that. It dates to SunOS 4. Of course, we > have to live in the world we've got, not the one we should have. Oh, I agree with all this. What symbol versioning additionally buys you is that if you change something in a way that you can still provide the old interface for backward compatibility, there is a means to do that which works correctly with both old code and new code. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
