Date: 7 Mar 96 09:14:55 GMT From: peter@jhome.DIALix.COM (Peter Wemm) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2.2-960226-SNAP now on ftp.freebsd.org Message-ID: <peter.826190095@jhome.DIALix.COM> References: <199603061143.NAA29815@grumble.grondar.za>, <15204.826114492@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes: >> Proposal: why do we not just get all of them - libc.so.2.2, libgcc.so.261.0 >> etc and make one compat2.n out of them (or is that done already?)? I'll do >Sounds fine to me! >> it if you fill me in on what you did... >Uh, you'll be disappointed - I looked at which libraries were bumped >between the last and current releases and packed the old versions into >a root-relative tarball by hand. That's all! :-) Just a reminder to everybody.. We do *not* need compat libraries for minor number "bumps". eg: when libutil.so.2.0 is bumped to .2.1, you do **not** add a libutil.so.2.0 to the compat dist. The dynamic linker always takes the highest minor version number anyway, so it's just wasting space. However, if we do a "major" bump, eg: from libc.so.2.2 to libc.so.3.0, we _do_ need to put the most recent version of libc.so.2.2 into the compat dist that we can find. And above all, *never* overwrite the shipped libraries with the old release. eg: for 2.0.5 and (I think) 2.1, all the lib*.so.2.0 files were spammed by the buggy old 2.0-RELEASE libraries. This caused tremendous confustion with the cross version incompatabities, remember the infamous "ld: telnetd: undefined symbol _des_set_key" etc? This was caused by the compat dist placing an old libkrb.so.2.0 over the "latest" version of libkrb.so.2.0 or something like that. At this point, the only difference between the compat dists for -stable snap's and the -current snap's, is that the one for -current should have a libc.so.2.2 in it while -stable should not. There should only be about 6 libraries in the tarball from memory. The -current snap's should have the most recent libc.so.2.2 that can be located from the 2.2-current tree, because the -current libc.so.2.2 has phkmalloc in it, while -stable has the expensive memory-hungry malloc. > Jordan Cheers, -Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?peter.826190095>