From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 061DD3858C52; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 12:29:38 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 061DD3858C52 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1686313779; bh=aoc/35PwyByAwxEkhtzmAtfrN7p+sXn2ML1bX68cwdI=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=xMhKwggVCr/XCoRxeelXM6xvSFEsiwTIL4M8mSHLAQwjxeaPZlzIvQaqy6IlI2Osn 3bdAd0zs7oD9bB+YUR8tCj9FKlaypauw2o4npsV+XCBJSDAmGZdtpAVRemcGQXSu/g gUxj0Fg4JtFoCOJTO8Hzb1SSW6StCDxHOTTUygnE= From: "dodji at redhat dot com" To: libabigail@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug default/30034] [libabigail] Handle library splitting Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2023 12:29:38 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: libabigail X-Bugzilla-Component: default X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: dodji at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dodji at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30034 --- Comment #10 from dodji at redhat dot com --- > > So, are you sure that librte_eal.so has ALL the split libraries > > (resulting from splitting the former big library into smaller ones) as > > dependencies? I mean, this really looks like a particular case of the > > general problem of being able to compare sets of ABI corpora. Sure, I > > understand how this particular use case is worth supporting (and I agree > > we should support it), but in the grand scheme of things, I am wondering > > if supporting /just/ this particular case makes sense. >=20 > If EAL does not have all dependencies listed, that would break ABI for > applications that are linked against and only knows of this library. OK, so that is the way you have designed the splitting. Making a front lib= rary (i.e, EAL) have all the others (resulting from the the split) as dependenci= es, I just wanted to be sure. Thank you for confirming. So I am adding this u= se case to the initial, generic & straightforward one. Thank you. So, after reading your comments and talking privately with you, David, I ha= ve updated the specification in the branch users/dodji/PR30034 at https://sourceware.org/git/?p=3Dlibabigail.git;a=3Dshortlog;h=3Drefs/heads/= users/dodji/PR30034. You can navigate the changes by looking at the 3 individual commits that co= me on top of the level of the master branch, or you can just look at the resul= ting specification file which is still: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=3Dlibabigail.git;a=3Dblob;f=3DREADME-ABIDIFF-= BINARIES-SET-SUPPORT.md;hb=3Drefs/heads/users/dodji/PR30034 Please do let me know if I am still off by a lot here :-) Thanks. I --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=