[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: HEADS UP: I will be merging christos-time_t by the end of the week
On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 04:11:02PM -0500, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> What Christos has done takes care of this case about as elegantly as
> possible. The existing executable will get libc.so.80 (the new version
> with the compatibility code) and the _old_ libY.so.10. This will work.
> A new executable will get libc.so.80 (with the compatibility code, which
> will be unused in this case) and libY.so.11, which will depend on
> libc.so.80. This will work.
> The problem will arise if you do this:
> * Build executable 'foo' on a new system with libc.so.80 and
> * Build libY.so.11 on an old (5.0) system with libc.so.80 (old
> version, no compat code, no 64-bit time_t).
> * Bring executable 'foo' to that system and try to run it. It
> will have libY.11, but that libY will have 32-bit time_t.
> Ow, ow, ow. But I see no graceful way around this.
ln -s libc.so.80 libc.so.90 (or vice versa)
Then executable 'foo' will explicitly depend on libc.so.90 and let you
know right away what's wrong when you run it on the 32-bit time_t system.
Main Index |
Thread Index |