From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libstdc++-return-14350-listarch-libstdc++=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 106830 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2019 08:45:35 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libstdc++-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libstdc++.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libstdc++-subscribe@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/>
List-Post: <mailto:libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libstdc++-help@gcc.gnu.org>, <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libstdc++-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 106822 invoked by uid 89); 8 Oct 2019 08:45:35 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*i:sk:CAMBgsw, H*f:sk:CAMBgsw
X-HELO: mail-wm1-f51.google.com
Received: from mail-wm1-f51.google.com (HELO mail-wm1-f51.google.com) (209.85.128.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 08:45:34 +0000
Received: by mail-wm1-f51.google.com with SMTP id r19so2198188wmh.2        for <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 01:45:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;        h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to         :cc;        bh=/SJrxJVhKfOueopqcjQylskJ6crliRYHj+qXEPHC64E=;        b=DMwEgEB5pdT7e8AQawmizLAXAxDkLXbNkueHO0IYoBdxHHXHJ53PucZvTgaFfXJ4Ke         TC+Din0hwqof4izpHSWGwAg1xQpn7C07QXFYkwi3MfScox/YGendLeSVJ4CMmhyh5PEy         M1yWvl5i1R0/pUOeN2yJd0QydSnkGsUOZKldyJIt/Ubcer7WUnuGdcrLBjYvG+c7qu4+         liA4mi6yxXOEY/WgF0lmE4aDDXrxft2gRkaON6fmdHxeNksdnP7ltDSOKUN3CWfbNcb1         IERhzovyWY349jDbSLxcV2jAjnyri7R/a7nxHVOGbDorBUu9kvhhxxLl/PIs09CwhzFT         oXqQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMBgswddN3LV_U3rVMGLRj58p42uFBjUVQdyjFbg1diFSsVhgQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMBgswddN3LV_U3rVMGLRj58p42uFBjUVQdyjFbg1diFSsVhgQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 08:45:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAH6eHdT5FJeD-xMerc6oSVuEUDRgM4NOTfJYwcZJABVy1BLW6A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: CXXABI_TM_1 status
To: Matthieu DARBOIS <mayeut.bugzilla@gmail.com>
Cc: "libstdc++" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2019-10/txt/msg00024.txt.bz2

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 22:13, Matthieu DARBOIS wrote:
>
> Hi,
> a new manylinux policy has been defined for python.
> This includes a series of allowed symbol versions from libstdc++ as
> can be seen here
> https://github.com/pypa/auditwheel/pull/192#discussion_r331555495
>
> We'd like confirmation that the CXXABI_TM_1 symbol version can be
> safely included in this policy.
> From what I understand from reading the sources, I'd say that it's
> safe to include this symbol version and that it won't disappear
> overnight (seems part of the a stable ABI since gcc 4.7.0).

Yes, it's part of the ABI baseline and can't be removed from
libstdc++.so without changing the SONAME of the library.

But why do you want to allow that symbol in manylinux binaries anyway?
Are people really using the experimental Transactional Memory
extensions in Python modules?