Hi Marcus, I am afraid that we can’t provide any guarantees about the BIND 9 internal libraries. We made a decision to drop the layers and layers of compatibility for the sake of maintainability.
That said, once the release is pronounced ESV (roughly a year from initial release), we try to minimize changes to that branch, but it could still happen if needed by a security fix. As for the binary compatibility, there’s no guarantee whatsoever, I think you need to match the full version to check whether the plug-in should be loaded. Honestly, the best way how to keep the plug-in that’s useful for wider audience maintained would be to contribute it to the BIND 9 with a promise that the authors will keep helping maintaining the plug-in. (We would like to avoid the situations where the author just dumps the code on us and don’t care anymore - there’s associated maintenance cost with any new feature.) Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý — ISC (He/Him) My working hours and your working hours may be different. Please do not feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours. > On 15. 12. 2022, at 20:10, Marcus Kool <marcus.k...@urlfilterdb.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > I have written a plugin for named and was wondering what the policy behind > the usage of plugin_version() is and what kind of compatibility check it > intends to perform. > > It is common for plugins to use query_ctx_t and its members fname, view, > client (client.message, client.query) etc. > Since these data structures may change between (patch) versions, a plugin > compiled for version A can get a SEGV signal because a data structure changed > and the plugin is used inside named version B. > I have little experience with data structure changes of named and observed > only the addition of refresh_rrset in query_ctx (somewhere between 9.16.1 and > 9.16.35) which did not cause an issue since its 1-byte size did not change > offsets of most members inside the query_ctx struct. > > In our plugin, plugin_register() checks for the major and minor version > number in named_g_version so a plugin compiled with 9.16.x refuses to > initialize inside a 9.18.y named process and vice versa. But I have the > impression that this might not be a 100% guarantee that all is well. > > Because we like to release as few as possible versions of the plugin I have a > second question: how can we be sure that a plugin compiled with 9.X.1 will > have no issues accessing named data structures for all patch versions of 9.X? > > Thanks, > > Marcus > > > > > > -- > Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from > this list > > ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. > Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. > > > bind-users mailing list > bind-users@lists.isc.org > https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
-- Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
