Paul Irofti <p...@irofti.net> wrote: > > > The libc bump is there because it helps me switch more easily between > > > versions. > > > > That is bogus. Minors are used for visible ABI additions, majors are > > used for ABI deletions or API changes visible as ABI. Please don't > > argue for a vague extension of the rules again. > > I do not know what you are taking about here. I am not looking at any > extension of the rules, nor was I in the past. The whole issue of > bumping I leave it up to you and whoever understands these rules. Some > developers said this is not required, including kettenis@, and this is > why I justified the bump in my diff. That and it might also help others > quickly test the diff.
Repeatedly you were told this wasn't needed, but you kept shipping diffs which do it. And now there are developers who have a future-numbered libc on their system, which doesn't do future things. It is not justifiable. It does NOT help people quickly test the diff, as such an approach requires making assumptions which are more complicated then the diff. This is not the purpose of major and minor numbers!
