This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Releases 2.27 and 2.26.1
- From: Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>
- To: Matthias Klose <doko at ubuntu dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:21:59 +0200
- Subject: Re: Releases 2.27 and 2.26.1
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <2D5A1F96-A731-4D41-9C77-FFB069F1115F at adacore dot com> <CAMe9rOrExdme4V=oPPFV9_oMm-V69CS_y_=BBNUGrdkTy0evQQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20160623005041 dot GC20200 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CAMe9rOrh5iafSfibFp4WtMSoGoREy+XByi77kFot6emXCJraiQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <576B718A dot 8020104 at ubuntu dot com>
> On 23 Jun 2016, at 07:20, Matthias Klose <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 23.06.2016 05:41, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Alan Modra <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 02:36:09PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>> We should correct sonames:
>>> What exactly is wrong with sonames? If you build with
>>> development=true you get the date included in the soname, if not, you
>>> don't. That seems good to me.
>> It is fine for master, but not for release branch. On 2.26 branch, I got
>> libbfd-188.8.131.5260614.so libbfd.so libopcodes.la
>> libbfd.a libopcodes-184.108.40.20660614.so libopcodes.so
>> libbfd.la libopcodes.a
>> On release branch, we should change soname only when ABI is changed.
> we don't do that by default, just the 2.26 release was made in development mode.
> I don't mind if the soname changes to 2.26.1 for a point release.
Yes, that's my plan. The 2.26.0 release was incorrectly made in development mode
and that will be fixed (I hope!) for 2.26.1. Therefore the SONAME will be
different. I don't want to have a work-around for a transient error.
> Plus in the
> past distributions were also reminded to use their own soname for distro builds.