Thus spake Jason Thorpe ("JT> ") sometime Today...

JT> That's because we've hashed the issue over and over literally *years*
JT> ago, and even experienced some of the pain when we tried to bump the
JT> libc major during that time period.  The pain we experienced is what
JT> caused us to down-rev back to the previous libc major and implement
JT> symbol renaming.  This is a dead horse, and frankly, we have better
JT> things to do with our time than educate you when the information is out
JT> there for your own gathering.
JT>
JT> Those of us arguing against bumping the libc major know, from
JT> experience, what we're talking about.  You, as far as I can tell, have
JT> absolutely zero clue as to the scope of the problem.
JT>
JT> I suggest you educate yourself.  Start by reading the mailing list
JT> archives from years past.

For what it's worth, it seems to me that the problem could have well been
mitigated by inter-library version consistency checks, but I will also
state that in this arena, I am nigh completely uneducated on the trials
and tribulations which have shown themselves to be so complicated,
so for my part, I hereby apologise profusely for calling an open() on
this pointer to an array of functions returning an array of pointers
to cans of worms.

I'm not convinced it's not possible, and I'm not convinced the pain
would have to be experienced more than once if proper mechanisms were
to be put in place, but as I said, my knowledge in depth is regrettably
negligible.  I'll >try to< have a way of accomplishing this the next time
I bring this up.

				--*greywolf;
--
After 5 PM please slip brain through slot in door.