* Richard Shaw: > While API/ABI breaking changes within a release is discouraged, it's > still might be the right thing to do. libffi within a Fedora release? That seems rather ... involved because Python depends on it. I don't think we'll need ABI changes for CET support, and we plan to port CET support into Fedora 31's (and 32's) libffi 3.1 version. But I won't be able to work on this before April at least. The justification for the first soname bump (to .7) does not appear to be correct to me: introducing symbol versioning does not need a soname bump with the GNU ELF implementation, and the aarch64 change only affects Mach-O targets, not ELF targets. The ELF ABI is in fact unchanged. If I'm counting correctly, we currently use only 20 out of 36 bytes for the aarch64 trampoline, so there's room for future BTI support as well. Thanks, Florian _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
