On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 10:11:10AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Paul Irofti <p...@irofti.net> wrote: > > > > > The libc bump is there because it helps me switch more easily between > > > > versions. > > > > > > That is bogus. Minors are used for visible ABI additions, majors are > > > used for ABI deletions or API changes visible as ABI. Please don't > > > argue for a vague extension of the rules again. > > > > I do not know what you are taking about here. I am not looking at any > > extension of the rules, nor was I in the past. The whole issue of > > bumping I leave it up to you and whoever understands these rules. Some > > developers said this is not required, including kettenis@, and this is > > why I justified the bump in my diff. That and it might also help others > > quickly test the diff. > > Repeatedly you were told this wasn't needed, but you kept shipping diffs > which do it. And now there are developers who have a future-numbered libc > on their system, which doesn't do future things. > > It is not justifiable. > > It does NOT help people quickly test the diff, as such an approach > requires making assumptions which are more complicated then the diff. > This is not the purpose of major and minor numbers!
Oh, I see. You are correct. My appologies for that. I did not fully understand the consequences. I will send out a new diff w/o the bump.
