This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] change GLIBC PPC64/ELF2 ABI default to 2.17
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>, munroesj at us dot ibm dot com, Adam Conrad <adconrad at 0c3 dot net>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Adhemerval Zanella <azanella at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:26:58 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] change GLIBC PPC64/ELF2 ABI default to 2.17
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1391008726 dot 16702 dot 105 dot camel at spokane1 dot rchland dot ibm dot com> <52EA5D7A dot 9000903 at suse dot com> <1391095043 dot 16702 dot 200 dot camel at spokane1 dot rchland dot ibm dot com> <52EA75E4 dot 2050700 at suse dot com>
On 01/30/2014 10:55 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>>> Since there are apparently backported 2.17 and 2.18 versions out there,
>>> let me ask a different question: Which ABI will be the one that you
>>> promise stability for?
>>>
>> The GLIBC 2.19 will be the 2.19 ABI and the GLIBC-2.17 will be the 2.17
>> ABI. We want to insure that PPC64LE ELF2 binary build on GLIBC-2.17 will
>> run on a 2.18 or 2.19 or later GLIBC. We do not expect a binary build on
>> 2.19 will run on GLIBC 2.18 or 2.17. But this the normal definition.
>
> An ABI is more than just the default symbol version.
>
> I'm asking for a stability promise of the ABI that will be in glibc.
>
> What if the implemented 2.17 glibc used by Carlos is by accident
> incompatible to the 2.19 ABI? Which ABI will then be broken to get those
> compatible again.
Once the ABI is published in a release the onus is on me to fix it
in the distributions I support.
>>> My expectation is that the official glibc 2.19 release to be the
>>> reference version and if there are any incompatibilities between the
>>> backports and the glibc 2.19 release, the backports need to be fixed.
>>>
>> yes the 2.18 and 2.17 back ports must have forward compatible with
>> GLIBC-2.19, which the normal requirement. I and not asking for change to
>> the GLIBC-2.19 ABI. I am asking to change the GLIBC DEFAULT symbol for
>> the new PPC64LE platform to be 2.17.
>>
>>> Can we all agree on using glibc 2.19 as the reference for ABI stabilitiy?
>>>
>> I agree. Adam, Carlos?
I agree.
Cheers,
Carlos.