Re: ZFS v28: call for testing
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
On 03.11.2011 13:09, Robert Millan wrote:
> They'd need to share the same source, also because most of the code
> (including compatibility glue) is lumped together in the same
> directories:
>
> cddl/compat/opensolaris
> cddl/contrib/opensolaris
> sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris
> sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris
You mean, you'd build zfsutils and dtrace out of the same source
package? That's probably ok.
> However, this doesn't mean they have to be in the same binary package.
> They should be separate binaries, or we'd be forcing all ZFS users to
> install dtrace, etc. This is where shared libraries are useful.
Fully agree. If dtrace has such a dependency there is no point to
install libraries to /lib/zfsutils.
> If we remove -dev packages, we won't have external users anymore, then
> checking for ABI changes becomes unnecessary.
No, there you are wrong. You'd run once more into the very same problem
we had recently. Since the libraries aren't producing a clean version
information, zfsutils (and dtrace in future) would depend unversioned on
libwhatever.
That would mean, zfsutils could be updated without getting a newer
library version aside unless you push SONAME ABI for every release. The
problem is, since we are not getting any version information from the
libraries, even adding symbols causes problems for the dependencies if
they require such a newer symbol than the library is providing.
> Btw, ABI verification is a lot more than just checking the symbols,
> it's common for subtle behaviour differences to go undetected. IMHO if
> upstream isn't doing it, we can't replace that job, we severely lack
> manpower for that.
>
There you are unfortunately right which is why I was experimenting with
private libraries. Your statement that dtrace will depend on those
libraries makes that plan of course obsolete.
- --
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=Cf3M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: