Re: obsoleting shlibs - what's the plan

[Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost>]

Michael van Elst <mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 10:53:02AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
>> I updated using BUILD-NetBSD from etcmanage, and then ran 'postinstall
>> fix obsolete'.  It deleted libraries that I think it shouldn't have:
>
>> So, I think these shouldn't have been marked obsolete, and that in
>> general that we should not obsolete previous major shlibs, just minor
>> ones (e.g., if .so.3.1 arrives we can remove .so.3.0, but not .so.2.1).
>
> I believe we should, these old and new libraries do not coexist nicely.

I don't understand.  Which kind of problem arises?

  programs linked against the old major won't dynlink right

  programs linked against the old major won't do the right thing

  new programs won't link right if the old major is present

  programs linked against the new major won't dynlink right

  programs linked against the new major won't run correctly


The only problem I can see is if the config file formats changed so much
that the old libraries get confused by the new config file formats.

If we do anything other than un-obsolete the older krb libs, we need an
entry in UPDATING.