the sorry saga of the talloc soname 'fix'
abartlet at samba.org
Sun Jul 5 23:08:29 GMT 2009
On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 11:24 +1000, tridge at samba.org wrote:
> Hi Jeremy and Simo,
> > Thanks a *lot* for this one Simo, much appreciated.
> I'm finding all this congratulation rather disturbing. The patch from
> Simo now creates the very problem you are all so keen to avoid.
> With the soname bump we had lots of standard mechanisms in place (both
> packaging and loader) to try to stop having two versions of the
> library in place at the same time. It would be detected at package
> install time, and also at runtime by Metze's patch.
> As for avoiding this with symbol versioning, that's all well and good
> on platforms that have symbol versioning, but many of the platforms
> that we claim we support don't have that, so now we've left them out
> in the cold.
Why are we even trying to provide and use 'Samba' shared libraries on
systems without symbol versions?
(And yes, I'm aware that systems without GNU ld can't use them, but
given that Samba libraries such as talloc are meant to be a 'value add'
- not the fundamental purpose of the project, we should be able to set
the rules about where we support them to the places where we can do so
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Cisco Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20090706/91cbf337/attachment.bin
More information about the samba-technical