Bug#561291: Symbol versioning bug

[Simon Josefsson]

I have created a pre-release of 1.17 with my suggested fix:

http://daily.josefsson.org/libidn/libidn-20100203.tar.gz

It builds fine using the debian libidn package stuff from CVS:

cvs -d :pserver:anonym...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/libidn co debian-libidn

No lintian warnings (except for the expected 3.8.3 vs 3.8.4 problem).

I'll be away the entire next week, so I plan to release this on Friday
if I haven't heard any objections. I'd appreciate quick review if this
is looking OK.

/Simon



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#561291: Symbol versioning bug

[Simon Josefsson]

I have pre-released 1.17, available from:

http://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/libidn/libidn-1.17.tar.gz
http://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/libidn/libidn-1.17.tar.gz.sig

I've also uploaded it to debian experimental.

/Simon



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#561291: Symbol versioning bug

[Marco d'Itri]

On Feb 03, Simon Josefsson  wrote:

> I'll be away the entire next week, so I plan to release this on Friday
> if I haven't heard any objections. I'd appreciate quick review if this
> is looking OK.
I do not understand why you introduced the LIBIDN_1.17 version tag, the
ABI does not have two different versions of these symbols which require
a version tag to distinguish them.
If you really want to pretend that the symbols never existed before
release 1.17 then you just add them along the others and declare an ABI
change: now packages using libidn built by distributions will either
depend on release >= 1.17 or use .symbols files like Debian does to
determine the exact version of libidn the package being built needs to
depend on.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#561291: Symbol versioning bug

[Simon Josefsson]

Simon Josefsson  writes:

> I have pre-released 1.17, available from:

The NEWS blurb is below.  I'll wait with making this a ftp.gnu.org
release until this issue has been more thoroughly understood...

/Simon

* Version 1.17 (released 2010-02-05)

** Fix symbol export problem for a few variables.
Applications (that use these rarely used variables) built against
versions before 1.13 did not work with libidn versions 1.13 to 1.16.

Symbol versioning was introduced in version 1.13 but by accident some
symbols that were visible before that release were not exported, and
the consequence was that those symbols were not available in version
1.13 to 1.16.  This release fixes the problem, so the symbols are
visible again, making this release backwards compatible with all
earlier releases.

The affected symbols are the following variables:
stringprep_iscsi_prohibit, stringprep_rfc3454_A_1,
stringprep_rfc3454_B_1, stringprep_rfc3454_B_2,
stringprep_rfc3454_B_3, stringprep_rfc3454_C_1_1,
stringprep_rfc3454_C_1_2, stringprep_rfc3454_C_2_1,
stringprep_rfc3454_C_2_2, stringprep_rfc3454_C_3,
stringprep_rfc3454_C_4, stringprep_rfc3454_C_5,
stringprep_rfc3454_C_6, stringprep_rfc3454_C_7,
stringprep_rfc3454_C_8, stringprep_rfc3454_C_9,
stringprep_rfc3454_D_1, stringprep_rfc3454_D_2,
stringprep_saslprep_space_map.

Thanks to Marco d'Itri  for reporting
 that led to
discovering this problem.

** Really fix the link error of self-tests on MinGW.

** API and ABI is backwards compatible with the previous version.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#561291: Symbol versioning bug

[Marco d'Itri]

On Feb 05, Simon Josefsson  wrote:

> What are you suggesting should be done instead?  Keep them under the old
> LIBIDN_1.0 version tag?  That would work too, I think.
Yes.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#561291: Symbol versioning bug

[Simon Josefsson]

m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:

> On Feb 03, Simon Josefsson  wrote:
>
>> I'll be away the entire next week, so I plan to release this on Friday
>> if I haven't heard any objections. I'd appreciate quick review if this
>> is looking OK.
> I do not understand why you introduced the LIBIDN_1.17 version tag, the
> ABI does not have two different versions of these symbols which require
> a version tag to distinguish them.
> If you really want to pretend that the symbols never existed before
> release 1.17 then you just add them along the others and declare an ABI
> change

No, what I'd like to achieve is to make the 1.17 release backwards
compatible with versions =< 1.13 (which did export these symbols), and
treat the forgotten symbols as newly added in libidn 1.17 as far as
versioned symbols is related.

What are you suggesting should be done instead?  Keep them under the old
LIBIDN_1.0 version tag?  That would work too, I think.

/Simon



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#561291: Symbol versioning bug

[Simon Josefsson]

m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:

> On Feb 05, Simon Josefsson  wrote:
>
>> What are you suggesting should be done instead?  Keep them under the old
>> LIBIDN_1.0 version tag?  That would work too, I think.
> Yes.

I think that makes more sense too.  I'll revert this part and prepare
version 1.18 when I'm back from vacation.

/Simon



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org