From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 35188 invoked by alias); 30 Jun 2015 01:56:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 35066 invoked by uid 89); 30 Jun 2015 01:56:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 01:56:35 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 721A52B7861; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 01:56:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.3.232.162] (vpn-232-162.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.232.162]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t5U1uWoO009055; Mon, 29 Jun 2015 21:56:32 -0400 Message-ID: <1435628930.13727.193.camel@surprise> Subject: Re: Thinking about libgccjit SONAME bump for gcc 5.2 (was Re: Four jit backports to gcc 5 branch) From: David Malcolm To: Ulrich Drepper Cc: Dibyendu Majumdar , jit@gcc.gnu.org, "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 02:05:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: References: <1435592671.13727.136.camel@surprise> <1435613171.13727.189.camel@surprise> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg02134.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 18:34 -0400, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:26 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > I'm looking at ways to manage libgccjit API/ABI as per this thread: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01982.html > > by transitioning to using symbol versioning, so that the linker can tag > > subsets of libgccjit symbols in both libgccjit and in client binaries. > > You don't have to bump the SONAME to introduce symbol versioning. > glibc in the beginning didn't have symbol versioning and we wrote the > linker and dynamic linker support so that no SONAME change was > necessary. The idea is that unversioned symbols are satisfied by the > oldest symbol version. Aha! Thanks. I won't bump the SONAME, in that case, I'll just add symbol versioning, and each new symbol will go it a new tag.