* Bruno Haible: > Hi Adhemerval, > > Thank you for working on this. > >> it breaks our previous policy of not adding retroactively symbols.
And therefore this breaks versioned dependencies in most RPM-based distributions. > Why not version 2.44.1 ? I guess the symbol versioning mechanism must support > version numbers of the form <major>.<minor>.<subminor>, because in the past, > some symbols were assigned to versions GLIBC_2.3.3 or GLIBC_2.3.4, for > instance. We still have lots of old symbols like that. But we don't really know how software reacts to new symbols of that structure. The gnulib problem occurs only after a rebuild. An adverse reaction to the 2.44.1 symbol structure might happen just after a glibc update, with old applications. Hard to tell beforehand if this is a good trade-off. A quick 2.45 release might be another option. But I'm not quite convinced any of this is necessary.
