On Dec 10, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Andrew J. Schorr wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:01:51PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote: >> If we go with just the evidence at hand: Andrew says he can rebuild his application. Thus, so far there is no specific requirement to expand "-i". IMO we should wait until there is, in the most noble of Linux traditions. >> > > To be fair, this will require porting work on my side. It is not a completely > trivial recompile, since some of the data structures have changed a little > bit. The libtirpc legacy API should be the same as the glibc RPC API. If you spot any truly non-ABI compatible changes, or have any other related questions, please let us know. (we should probably cc libtirpc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx). > I don't know whether removing from glibc is a great idea because of this > aspect. The new TIRPC code is not 100% compatible (for example, struct XDR has > some differences in the xdr_ops). I personally think that adding > '__attribute__ (( __deprecated__ ))' to all the function prototypes in > /usr/include/rpc/*.h would be a good first step, and also add a comment to the > header files directing people to port their code to the new tirpc API. A port to the new API shouldn't be necessary. libtirpc has all of the legacy API available. -- Chuck Lever chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
