Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 13:53:07 +0400 From: Dmitrij Tejblum <tejblum@arc.hq.cti.ru> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl> Cc: Dmitrij Tejblum <tejblum@arc.hq.cti.ru>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 32+ signals and library versions Message-ID: <199909090953.NAA01806@tejblum.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 09 Sep 1999 07:54:09 %2B0200." <37D74B81.FDE66686@scc.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > I suggest to try to avoid the version bump. NetBSD-like way to do it:
> > Give new implementations another names in object files, so that they
> > don't conflict with old implementations, and preserve old
> > implementations in the library too. To make the compiler generate calls
> > to new implementations, one can add appropriate #define s in .h files.
> > For GCC, __asm__ attribute also can be used.
>
> That still is an interface change and thus needs a version bump. How else
> do I know wich version x library has the new implementations (besides the
> larger one :-)?
No, when new functions are added into the library, and binaries linked
with the old library will continue to work with new library, version bump
is not required.
This is a standard rule. It was also recently discussed on -committers
on Aug 20 in the thread
Re: cvs commit: src/include histedit.h src/lib/libedit Makefile editline.3 el.c el.h
> How else
> do I know wich version x library has the new implementations (besides the
> larger one :-)?
Linker knows it. If some function ("new implementation") is missing, linker print
an error message. This is all you need.
Dima
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199909090953.NAA01806>