From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 18 08:30:08 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8FA16A4CE; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:30:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from www.portaone.com (web.portaone.com [195.70.151.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 050BD43D41; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:30:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Received: from [192.168.0.254] ([192.168.2.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by www.portaone.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j2I83fuO047758 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:44 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Message-ID: <423A8B51.3010609@portaone.com> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:03:29 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Porta Software Ltd User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Warner Losh References: <20050317.233645.74714466.imp@bsdimp.com> <20050318064521.GA42508@VARK.MIT.EDU> <423A86D9.5030504@portaone.com> <20050318.005008.71126625.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20050318.005008.71126625.imp@bsdimp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/685/Wed Jan 26 10:08:24 2005 clamav-milter version 0.80j on www.portaone.com X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: danfe@FreeBSD.ORG cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG cc: scottl@samsco.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG cc: das@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/msun/i387 fenv.c fenv.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:30:09 -0000 Warner Losh wrote: > From: Maxim Sobolev > Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/msun/i387 fenv.c fenv.h > Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:44:25 +0200 > > >>David Schultz wrote: >> >>>On Thu, Mar 17, 2005, Warner Losh wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>You had better bump the version number for libm before 6.0 rolls >>>>>around!! I've just found a 3rd party binary-only package that >>>>>supports 'FreeBSD 5.x' but is linked against libm.so.2. Ugh. We >>>>>need to bury that mistake and NOT make it again. >>>> >>>>6.0 already has /lib/libm.so.3 >>> >>> >>>So does 5.3. I think Scott's point is that if we're going to bump >>>it for 6.X at all, we had better do it soon or risk running into >>>the same mess we had before. I agree with that, although at >>>present I don't know of a compelling reason to do the bump the >>>libm version number at all. >> >>Haven't several functions been removed from -CURRENT version of libm >>recently? IMHO this provides sufficient reason for version bump. >>Actually I think it makes sense to bump all libraries automatically when >>-CURRENT goes one major number up. There is just no much sense in >>preserving partial compatibility. > > > One of the problems with an overly agressive bumping is that if you > bump, you have to bump *EVERYTHING* that depends on the library to get > true compatbility, even the ports (and have different majors build > based on using libc.so.5 vs libc.so.6, a real pita). When I looked > into the major abi issues we had a while ago, I came to this > conclusion. I also came to the conclusion that we'd be better off > keeping compatibility and *NEVER* bumping a fundamental library's > major number to avoid these problems. Alas, no one listens to me, and > they make incompatible changes (like removing functions), so we're > stuck in the false belief that major numbers are going to save us.[*] What's the problem with ports? I think one who want to run older ports on newer system can install compatXX package, no? -Maxim