Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:30:56 -0500 (EST)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Renaming all symbols in libmp(3)
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.0902261329330.12228@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <20090226182543.GY19161@hoeg.nl>
References:  <20090226180756.GX19161@hoeg.nl> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0902261315150.12228@sea.ntplx.net> <20090226182543.GY19161@hoeg.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Ed Schouten wrote:

> * Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> Why don't you add symbol versioning to libmp, so that old
>> binaries will still work, but new ones will get the new
>> symbols by default.  Hmm, will that work without bumping
>> SHLIB_MAJOR?  You might want to play around with it and
>> see.
>
> Well, even without symbol versioning this could be done, by just making
> a __strong_reference() between the symbols, but I decided not to do so.
> I think solutions like these are perfect when just renaming/removing a
> couple of symbols, but because we're basically touching everything, I
> thought we'd better just use the old approach.

Well, as long as you're in there, maybe you should add
symbol versioning anyway, even after a library version
bump.  Seems like it would be easy since there aren't
that many symbols.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0902261329330.12228>