Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 21:18:08 +0200 From: Ed Schouten <ed@nuxi.nl> To: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Cc: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: lib/libc/Versions.def: new symbol version for 12.x Message-ID: <CABh_MK=cLNrCiVEKdCHxicaJj6dGGyRw4KDEwY5bJuDp2tXcVA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAPyFy2DymK8g3V357f7WbedD3qXbabcN3=d3vGNJWFcBQ6cNbQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CABh_MKnZkd3U0jV07idrpHqaniZvzUbhnSHz3BpAAKOi7d807Q@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.1607291445570.11109@sea.ntplx.net> <CAPyFy2DymK8g3V357f7WbedD3qXbabcN3=d3vGNJWFcBQ6cNbQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2016-07-29 21:10 GMT+02:00 Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>: > On 29 July 2016 at 14:53, Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> New symbol versions can be rolled back to -stable or other prior >> baselines. > > If that happens I think having an FBSD_12.0 symbol in stable/11 > actually makes it more clear what's happening, than if a FBSD_1.5 > symbol appears in stable/11. Yes, exactly. The version number would just indicate the version of -CURRENT that was used to introduce the symbol. If we would be going down this road, then I have to further questions: - Should we drop the .0 suffix then? - Would it make sense to also name it to 'FreeBSD' instead of 'fBSD'? That is, using 'FreeBSD_12' as the next symbol version. -- Ed Schouten <ed@nuxi.nl> Nuxi, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands KvK-nr.: 62051717
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CABh_MK=cLNrCiVEKdCHxicaJj6dGGyRw4KDEwY5bJuDp2tXcVA>