Re: Debian glibc symbol version stuff
Guillem Jover, le Tue 25 Oct 2011 00:01:38 +0200, a écrit :
> On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 23:44:27 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > __vm_statistics@Base 2.11
> > > > __vm_wire@Base 2.11
> > > > __vm_write@Base 2.11
> > > > - __xxx_cpu_control@Base 2.11
> >
> > I guess this is also due to changes? Same answer: dropping symbols in a
> > lib is something of high importance that symbol lists help to catch.
>
> I'm guessing this and the other similar ones are due to
> dd48e23f43730038df4bb191e7acc47a4ab73c69 in gnumach.
Ah, right.
> > > Now, the question is whether the RPC user stubs should get Debian symbol
> > > versioning at all, or if they're simply a best-effort thing?
> >
> > Making them a best-effort would mean that some programs using them would
> > get broken when they are removed. We don't really want that :)
>
> Given the above, that would mean we can never remove RPCs from
> gnumach? That seems a bit tough.
Well, if you're sure that no binary packages use them, then you can, but
the symbol list prevents you from inadvertently remove RPCs.
Samuel
Reply to: