Hi. This is a question for the Hurd developers:
I noticed that the libc in GNU 0.2, libc.so.0.2, has "0.2" as version number. Does this mean that the libc in GNU 0.3 will have "0.3" as version number? Will this break every executable? Will a simple symlink libc.so.0.2 -> libc.so.0.3 be enough for backwards compatibility? Do we maybe want not to have backwards compatibility? I know Linux uses "libc.so.6" for historical reasons. Should we use perhaps "libc.so.2" for GNU/Hurd, to be consistent? Thanks. -- "e8f2095655bb6bc8e6684feeeacbbfd6" (a truly random sig)