06.10.2016, 08:23, "Pierre-Yves Chibon": > On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 06:36:16PM +0300, Ponomarenko Andrey wrote: >> The tool is based on different software stack for analysis of backward >> compatibility developed since 2009: https://github.com/lvc (ABI Compliance >> Checker, ABI Dumper, etc.) >> >> RedHat created an alternative libabigail tool in 2013. Implementation and >> reports are completely different. But anyway, two is better than one. Now we >> can verify reports of both tools by each other. > > I'm confused what Red Hat as to do in there. As far as I know, it's a person > not > a company that runs the development or libabigail and I very much doubt that > this person was tasked to do that by some higher power. > > That being said, did you look at it? Did you make some comparison on how it > performs compared to this stack you mention? > Are there times where one finds something that the other don't, vice-versa? > Can they be ranked or are they too different to be compared? > > Thanks, > Pierre
After a closer look at the source code, reports and docs of abipkgdiff / libabigail tools I can list some pros and cons of https://github.com/lvc/pkg-abidiff / abi-compliance-checker: PROS - separated analysis of both backward binary compatibility and backward source compatibility - assigning severity levels to ABI changes - explaining effects of ABI changes - checks for more compatibility rules - less false positives - visual reports - grouping of affected ABI interfaces by root cause (usually a change in the structure of data type), so the output report is more compact and easy to review - estimating total compatibility rate of an object CONS - may be slower and consume more RAM memory than libabigail tools due to implementation language (C++ vs Python/Perl/C) - the generation of output report is not configurable (can't pass any additional options to abi-compliance-checker via cli interface of pkg-abidiff) - no option to generate detailed plain-text report (only console output and summary report in JSON format are present) Please describe more CONS if any. I'll try soon to compare outputs of both tools on a test library that implements almost all ABI changes noted in "Policies/Binary Compatibility Issues With C++" [1] in order to check out how it works in practice. Anyway it is very handy to have two different implementations. In the future I will verify updates by both abipkgdiff/libabigail and pkg-abidiff/abi-compliance-checker tools. Thank you. [1] https://community.kde.org/Policies/Binary_Compatibility_Issues_With_C%2B%2B _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
