Re: HEADS UP: I will be merging christos-time_t by the end of the week

[Eric Haszlakiewicz <erh%nimenees.com@localhost>]

On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 01:20:41PM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
> >> Ow, ow, ow.  But I see no graceful way around this.
> > How about:
> > ln -s libc.so.80 libc.so.90  (or vice versa)
> > ?
> 
> Won't that break badly when libc gets "honestly" bumped to .90?

It seems to me like it actually _is_ being bumped to .90 but happens to be
backwards compatible in a way that allows it to masquerade as a .80 lib.
If another bump happens, you'd go to .100, and then you'd end up with 
.80, .90 and .100 all pointing at the same file.  If a bump happens in
such a way that the compat functions are removed, then those links go away.

btw, does anyone know how the symbol versioning that glibc uses compares
what we do?

eric