* Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes?
@ 2014-06-15 19:13 99% ` Matt Turner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Matt Turner @ 2014-06-15 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some time ago we've got bug #510780 [1] asking us to bump subslot
> on LLVM even though the new version was ABI-compatible with previous
> one. It was because it introduced new APIs which applications could
> make use of. Since I believe this is a wider issue, I would like to
> know the opinion of our community about this.
>
> More specifically: do we want subslots to change only when backwards-
> incompatible ABI changes are done -- alike SONAME -- or whenever any
> ABI change is done? The problem seems a bit complex.
I think subslot should only change with SONAME. Packages depending on
a new API can use a versioned dependency to ensure the new API is
available.
I think this covers all of the cases and doesn't cause problems? Let
me know if I've misunderstood something.
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-06-14 14:41 [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes? Michał Górny
2014-06-15 19:13 99% ` Matt Turner
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox