From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Mar 27 14:26:15 1995
Return-Path: current-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id OAA11870 for current-outgoing; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 14:26:15 -0800
Received: from trout.sri.MT.net (trout.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.12]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id OAA11864 for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 14:26:03 -0800
Received: (from nate@localhost) by trout.sri.MT.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) id PAA03724; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 15:30:12 -0700
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 15:30:12 -0700
From: Nate Williams <nate@trout.sri.MT.net>
Message-Id: <199503272230.PAA03724@trout.sri.MT.net>
In-Reply-To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu>
       "Re: shared library versioning" (Mar 27,  5:18pm)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: shared library versioning
Cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk



> <<On Mon, 27 Mar 1995 13:52:48 -0800 (PST), Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@ref.tfs.com> said:
> 
> > No I can't.  But until somebody actually uses that particular symbol for 
> > something, then I don't really want to see 2.1 being >that< incompatible.
> 
> > Alternatively we shoule decide that this is the way it will be, and bump
> > the number at any and all release hereafter.
> 
> No, I don't think so.  Only libraries whose interface has changed
> should be bumped, and said bumping should occur at most once during
> the release cycle.

Just in case it wasn't obvious, I'm in complete agreement with Garrett
here.  I don't think the library should be bumped again in this release,
but it needed to be done for reasons already explained, and now was as
good a time as any to do it.


Nate