On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Andrew Haley <aph(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 04/13/2012 01:59 AM, Anthony Green wrote:
>
> I recently release libffi 3.0.11, and ABI changes are mandating a .so
> number change. Despite the ABI change, I suspect that simple rebuilds
> are all that will be required for dependent packages.
>
> The ABI changes are simply:
>
> 1. Some internal debugging functions that should never have been
> exported have been removed:
>
> void ffi_stop_here(void)
> void ffi_assert(char *expr, char *file, int line)
> void ffi_type_test(ffi_type *a, char *file, int line)
>
> 2. A new function has been introduced to support
> variadic functions (ffi_prep_cif_var).
>
> Libtool's guidelines for .so versioning mandate that I move from
> libffi.so.5.0.11 to libffi.so.6.0.0 (because functions have been
> removed).
>
> There are more than a handful of packages that depend on libffi, so
> I'm looking for advice on when to make this change. Also, is there a
> convenient way to determine which packages in all of Fedora depend on
> libffi? I would like to notify the maintainers that rebuilds will be
> required. Or is there some other way to do this?
I don't think we need this for F17. F18 will do.
Agreed, I think a soname change and large rebuild after Beta is hard
to justify. Not impossible, but hard. F18 for sure.
-J
Andrew.
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie