Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libpthread

[Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost>]

> | > >| Furthermore, was it safe to add a new pthread_condattr_setclock(3) 
> function
> | > >| without libpthread minor bump?  I'm afraid pkgsrc ruby193 (and other)
> | > >| binaries built on 6.1 silently fails on 6.0.1.
> | > >
> | > >It was a mistake, we should have bumped.
> | > 
> | > Note, that bumping would have just changed the nature of the failure, 
> would
> | > not have fixed the problem.
> | 
> | Is it generally acceptable to bump minor
> | (i.e. adding new public functions in libs)
> | in release branches?
> 
> It depends on where we build 3rd party binaries. If we build on
> the earliest branch there is no problem. But if we build in the
> latest one there is. We should write the rules down, so that we
> don't repeat the same problem on each release. Perhaps the best
> solution is to add the missing function on all branches, but that
> does not help those who did not upgrade.

Can't we simply revert ticket #722 (pthread_condattr_setclock(3) addition)?
Is that function really necessary for 6.1?

---
Izumi Tsutsui