rawhide report: 20051110 changes

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Avi Kivity <avi at argo.co.il> 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 at hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.