[libbluray-devel] [PATCH] add symbol versioning to shared library

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

Symbol visibility reduction is definitely a good thing. I wouldn't bother
too much removing the versioning, but it's going to be more work to keep it
up to date. If you don't plan on keeping ABI retrocompatibility on the long
term I would suggest to roll this back and go with just symbol visibility
through libtool
<https://www.flameeyes.eu/autotools-mythbuster/libtool/symbols.html>.

Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flameeyes at flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/


On 3 September 2014 23:34, Sean McGovern <gseanmcg at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Petri & Diego,
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes at flameeyes.eu
> > wrote:
>
>> Please note that symbol versioning only makes sense if you plan to
>> *replace the ABI of a function in a later version*. If you do that, then
>> no, building against a new version and trying to run it against an old
>> version will not work.
>>
>> If you don't plan to make changes like that, symbol versioning is totally
>> useless.
>>
>> Also, please don't make it optional, but only conditional on the OS,
>> because mixing builds with and without versioning across distributions
>> would jsut be a huge headache for no gain.
>>
>>
> With these concerns, maybe instead of symbol versioning I could/should
> just convert this to a symbol visibility reduction script? Or should I just
> discard my patch entirely?
>
> -- Sean McG.
>
> _______________________________________________
> libbluray-devel mailing list
> libbluray-devel at videolan.org
> https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/libbluray-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/libbluray-devel/attachments/20140904/7856d6ba/attachment.html>