Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 3/6] Implement the %OB specifier - alternative month names (bug 10871)

[Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak@lingonborough.com>]

2.06.2016 00:20 Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>
> [...] However, if
> glibc uses the old behavior when the application links to the old
> strftime, and the new behavior when the application links to the new
> strftime, then old executables will have the same old behavior even when
> linked to new glibc, which was Dmitry's point.

Aaah, that's it! I did not know such a feature exists. So AFAIU this
means that an executable provides to glibc some info what glibc version
it was originally compiled with and if glibc is newer it is still able
to provide the old behavior for old executables. Sounds nice, I will
have to read more about it. (Any hints, links etc. are welcome.)

> Even if the new behavior is standardized and is more likely to be what
> the user wants, there will almost surely be cases where the old behavior
> is preferable (if only to make regression tests pass :-), and the
> natural way to tell programmers about this is to say that old programs
> get the old behavior and new programs get the new one.

What if a programmer, for example an author of cal(1), just rebuilds
the unmodified source while it should be modified? Is there a way to
tell them they should at least verify their source code?

Anyway, I understand that I have to provide the old behavior for
old executables. You're welcome to provide feedback about other issues.

Regards,

Rafal