On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Michael Deutschmann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, Natanael Copa wrote: >> Since sublevel releases are not ABI compatible we need to adjust >> the soname to include the sublevel version. > > I see two reasons that this would be pointless. > > First, you'd need more than a more precise statement of the uClibc source > version, because with uClibc, a single version of the source can produce > many different ABI-incompatible libc.so.0 files.
So it make sense to let the soname be configurable? > Second, sonames don't really help with the C library, because every other > shared library on a system is linked to the C library. The differences in > the C library often distort the ABI of these other libraries. It's very > complicated to keep appropriate versions side-by-side because the soname > of the other shared libraries does not change. > > In the case where the C library change doesn't outright break the other > shared libraries, changing the soname makes it worse because an > application can end up loading two different C libraries at once -- one > through it's own DT_NEEDED, and one through the DT_NEEDED on another > shared library. Do you have any better suggestions how to upgrade a running system? -- Natanael Copa _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
