On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 12:11:17AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 18:49, Philip Guenther wrote: > > >> btw, no library version change because the function stubs already > >> existed. > > > > Hmm, since this is actually offering new functionality (by sem_open() > > and friends no longer always failing), I think it a minor bump would > > be appropriate. Consider that a program with an autoconf test of > > sem_open() will now return a different answer, just as if sem_open() > > was completely new. no? > > I hear you, but disagree. We fix program disabling bugs in libraries > frequently without bumping. I have always thought of library > versioning being more about "program integrity", as in all the pieces > you expect to find are all there, but it doesn't say anything about > the inner workings of the pieces.
As theo says, there are other library bumps later, but you're wrong. Use-case: new packages, slightly older snapshots. New packages actually make use of sem_open, because of said added functionality. Without a bump, pkg_add will allow to add them, and they won't work, because the functionality wasn't there... It is added functionality. It's not a minor bugfix.
