>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> writes:
    Robert>     Date:        Sat, 13 Oct 2001 15:31:32 +0200
    Robert>     From:        Ignatios Souvatzis <is@netbsd.org>
    Robert>     Message-ID:  <20011013153132.A26623@beverly.kleinbus.org>

    Robert>   | As has been discussed on the project mailing lists over and over:
    Robert>   | We can't bumb the libc major number, ever. We would have to bumb all the 
    Robert>   | major numbers of all shared libraries - our own and third-party
    Robert>   | - that reference libc (that is, all of them).

    Robert> I understand why we need to keep libc.12 essentially forever now, I don't
    Robert> understand why that means we can't have a libc.13 (and 14, and ...) as well.

...

    Robert> There's one reply I don't want to see though, that is "we can't do that
    Robert> because the xxx tool doesn't do yyy".   On the other hand, a response like
    Robert> "Before we can do that, the xxx tool would need to be enhanced to do yyy"
    Robert> would be just fine...

  We can't do that until we can have a way to detect at build (ld) time that
we have mixed dependancies in shared objects. That's the topic of another
branch of this thread.

]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another NetBSD/notebook using, kernel hacking, security guy");  [