Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:46:52 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org> Cc: David O'Brien <obrien@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man3 Makefile src/lib/libc/alpha/gen fpsetsticky.c src/lib/libc/powerpc/gen Makefile.inc fpsetsticky.c src/lib/libc/softfloat Makefile.inc src/lib/libc/sparc64/gen ... Message-ID: <20050316134418.G69441@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20050315203729.GB95619@VARK.MIT.EDU> References: <200503151553.j2FFrdeF075515@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050315191232.GA40227@dragon.NUXI.org> <20050315203729.GB95619@VARK.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, David Schultz wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005, David O'Brien wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:11:27AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 03:53:39PM +0000, David Schultz wrote: >>>> Log: >>>> Remove fpsetsticky(). >>> >>> Library version bump? It took several years to live through >>> the libm.so.2 fiasco, and I would hate to relive it. I haven't >>> verified it yet, but you may have just broken NAGWare's Fortran >>> 95 compiler without the version bump. >> >> We've already bumped libm.so for 6-CURRENT [to .3 from .2]. >> This change certainly cannot be MFC'ed though. >> >> How would bumping libm.so not break NAGWare Fortran? > > It turns out that fpsetsticky() was misplaced in libc, and libc > has already been bumped for 6.X. But as you point out, the bump > probably wouldn't fix NAGWare Fortran if this change broke it. > However, my change doesn't seem to have broken the demo version > available on the NAG website. But if I did break anything, please > let me know. It isn't even in libc for i386's (since it is inline and not backed by a function). So removing it can't affect binary compatibility on i386's. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050316134418.G69441>