Subject: Re: stdio FILE extension
To: Ignatios Souvatzis <email@example.com>
From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
Date: 10/14/2001 12:23:08
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 15:31:32 +0200
From: Ignatios Souvatzis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
| As has been discussed on the project mailing lists over and over:
| We can't bumb the libc major number, ever. We would have to bumb all the
| major numbers of all shared libraries - our own and third-party
| - that reference libc (that is, all of them).
I understand why we need to keep libc.12 essentially forever now, I don't
understand why that means we can't have a libc.13 (and 14, and ...) as well.
Once a new one is created, the old one can remain essentially stagnant,
perhaps receiving only serious bug fixes (probably only serious security
I keep getting the feeling that there's some technical reason I'm not
understanding why this can't work.
There's one reply I don't want to see though, that is "we can't do that
because the xxx tool doesn't do yyy". On the other hand, a response like
"Before we can do that, the xxx tool would need to be enhanced to do yyy"
would be just fine...