Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 14 Nov 2000 14:15:49 -0800
From:      asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami)
To:        stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: libc shlib version
Message-ID:  <vqcwve6td2i.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20001114081845.A76050@dragon.nuxi.com> (David O'Brien's message of "Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:18:45 -0800")
References:  <31309.974061923@winston.osd.bsdi.com> <200011130413.eAD4DKj41211@vashon.polstra.com> <vqcd7g09vtq.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <200011131727.eADHR8c42388@vashon.polstra.com> <vqc8zqnmqkb.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20001113153325.D39667@dragon.nuxi.com> <20001114081845.A76050@dragon.nuxi.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
 * From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org>

 * Not sure if you saw this message.  The more I think about it, I'm not
 * sure bumping the shared libc version will accomplish anything other than
 * require a compat4x distribution for 4.2-RELEASE.  For the 4.0R upgrade
 * kit you'd just have to include a libc.so.5, and that would mismatch the
 * kernel as bad as the libc.so.4 that is currently included.

Hmm.  That's a good point.  So you mean there is no way to build a
libc that works for 4.2 that will also work with a 4.0 kernel?  (I
don't think just changing the libc source on a 4.0 machine will
accomplish that.  Besides, that sounds even more dangerous, to build
something with mixed sources.)

 * > How did you get the included libc.so.4?  If you just took a -stable one
 * > that could easily be the problem.  The most correct way would be to take
 * > a 4.0-R machine w/src (or at least source and a chrooted build
 * > environment) and only update the libc sources and build libc.so.4 that
 * > way.

I don't know enough about the libc to make a decision here, so I will
respect whatever you experts decide.  However, incompatible is
incompatible and it seems to me that we should still bump the version
of libc just to make sure people won't get into a similar situation by
copying supposedly compatible shared library.  (If libc was at so.5 in
the upgrade kit it at least wouldn't have killed existing binaries.)

By the way, if the conclusion is that we can't provide an upgrade kit
that will work for 4.0R (regardless of whether we bump libc or not),
I'll just replace that package with something that prints "sorry, we
can't support that system anymore, please upgrade".

Satoshi


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqcwve6td2i.fsf>