On Thu, 16.01.14 17:33, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote: > > 2014/1/16 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl>: > > I am also a bit worried about so-bumps: currently we have very nice > > backwards > > compatibility, without any API removals. -daemon, -id128, -journal, -login > > are all still .so.0. But libsystemd-bus (libsystemd now) is much harder to > > keep this way, among other reasons, because it's much bigger, and much more > > experimental. > > I'd prefer if the libraries were kept separate, at least for the ones > for which it is possible without it beeing to painful. > At least libsytemd-daemon should imho be kept separate with a stable API/ABI. > We already have 10+ reverse dependencies of that library in Debian and > the list is constantly growing.
Sure, but as mentioned, if we end up merging libsystemd-daemon.so into libsystemd.so, both would be parallel installable and would not result in symbol clashes. Thus, the transition should be smooth... (Also note that it would still be the same scope, so if you are concerned about pulling in incompatible code into non-systemd boots, there's shouldn't be a problem) > So not having to go through soname transitions affecting potentially > quite a few packages would definitely be a big plus. Well, Debian is much better at doing smooth soname transitions, since it encodes the soname in the package name. With the symbol versioning we do this should really avoid any troubles... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
