This is the mail archive of the libc-ports@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
>> if the breakage is just in pthreads, i dont think the libc ABI needs to be >> bumped, just the pthread one ? libc provides look ahead stub functions for >> pthreads, so it shouldnt be affected by the breakage you've mentioned with >> static lock initializers ... >> >> libpthread.so.0 -> libpthread.so.1 > > While it's definetly Ubuntu and Debian's problem, not upstream's, > libpthread is bundled in the "libc6" package. Bumping just the > libpthread version will make packaging hard for those distros. If > there are other ABI breaking moves that need to be done that would > cause a bump from libc6, doing them now would help sidestep the > problem.
Well I am thinking in splitting out libpthread.so.X from the libc6 package if the ABI breakage is confirmed. This is still a very complicated transition, but I think far less packages are affected.
Well, the ABI breakage is confirmed. I just remember people siting some other corner case problems with the ABI they wanted to change. Now would be a great time to change it all over if we need to do this.
I am a bit busy right now, but I think we should put our transition ideas (at least for Debian, and probably Ubuntu) on a wiki, for example http://wiki.debian.org/HppaNptlTransition
-- Jeff Bailey - http://www.raspberryginger.com/jbailey/
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |