Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libc
To: Christos Zoulas <email@example.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/08/2003 07:07:53
On Monday, September 8, 2003, at 06:56 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Sep 7, 5:48pm, email@example.com (Jason Thorpe) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libc
> | Uh, you should not need to bump the libc version at all. The signal
> | trampoline symbol is referenced interally only. No
> | libc symbols changed, and therefore, you should not have bumped the
> | shlib version.
> | What problem are you attempting to avoid, here?
> People who do not read the instructions, and build a new userland with
> an old kernel, and suddently all their binaries core dump. By bumping
> the minor, I burn a number, but they can easily recover by removing the
> new library and making a few symlinks.
Have we ever done this before when a new kernel was required for a new
libc? Are we going to do this every time a new arch gets the siginfo
-- Jason R. Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>