Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 19:33:53 -0500 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: Alexander Revin <lyssdod@...il.com> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: ABI compatibility between versions On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 12:18:06AM +0100, Alexander Revin wrote: > Hi all, > > I know this have been briefly discussed here before, but still: does > musl guarantee in some way that executable/library compiled against > one musl version will work with another (for example, 1.18 and 1.21) > ? > > I remember there were concerns against embedding versioning > information in musl like glibc does, but is there a way to somehow > ensure the stability between releases? It guarantees that there is no ABI mismatch. That's not entirely the same as guaranteeing that it will work. If the application was relying on a bug in an old version to function, or was poking at some accidentally-exposed libc internals not defined as a public interface, it's possible that updating libc.so will expose this bug in the application. This is different from the glibc approach, which is to use symbol versioning to attempt to retain "bug-compatibility" with the version of glibc the application was linked with. Such a system forces new application binaries that want to be able to run on systems with old glibc to link against the old glibc, and thereby get the buggy behaviors even if they're running on a system without the bugs. Myself and most of the musl community I'm aware of consider this entirely unreasonable, and that's why musl doesn't do it. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.