On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 01:14:07AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > I see no explicit mention of the time64 transition. I think this should > be documented because the transition involved a no-SONAME-rename which > means we broke the involved architectures ABI, where we protected the > archive from that breakage via packaging metadata. But for locally > built code, this can silently break it while those binaries do not fail > to link. The exception (and its rationale) for i386 should also be > mentioned.
Agreed, but somebody needs to come up with the text. I don't know the rationales and what is actually noteworthy about the transition. Chris
