Once upon a time, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > Thomas M Steenholdt wrote: > >sometimes updating a shared library breaks the interface > > if the interface was broken. surly more than a rebuild would be > required. the application using the library would need to be updated. API != ABI (like kernel modules). > >or possibly even adds new features that we want. > > if we use the new feaures we need to update the code in the library's > users. if we don't, why is a rebuild required? Some programs will have support for new library versions before Fedora lands the new version (maybe the new library was in testing for a while for example). A rebuild will automatically pick up the new features and use them. > seems a lot of churn for a minor release. library authors should care > more. designing binary compatible capable interfaces is not that hard. The OpenSSL project doesn't really support shared libraries or seem to care about an ABI at all; every minor version (and some patch levels) break the ABI. -- Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
