DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>
Cc: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>,
	dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net, ray.kinsella@intel.com,
	ferruh.yigit@intel.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: fix soname info for 19.11 compatiblity
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:08:56 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191212150856.GD422@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <452a7a0a-2a44-5aec-76ed-f5cf2c8db7a6@ashroe.eu>

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:05:44PM +0000, Ray Kinsella wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/12/2019 13:58, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Thu, 2019-12-12 at 11:14 +0000, Ray Kinsella wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/12/2019 11:11, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:04:01AM +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 2019-12-11 at 10:26 +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> >>>>> The soname for each stable ABI version should be just the ABI
> >>>>> version
> >>>>> major
> >>>>> number without the minor number. Unfortunately both major and
> >>>>> minor
> >>>>> were
> >>>>> used causing version 20.1 to be incompatible with 20.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This patch fixes the issue by switching from 2-part to 3-part
> >>>>> ABI
> >>>>> version
> >>>>> numbers so that we can keep 20.0 as soname and using the final
> >>>>> digits
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> identify the 20.x releases which are ABI compatible. This
> >>>>> requires
> >>>>> changes
> >>>>> to both make and meson builds to handle the three-digit version
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> shrink
> >>>>> it to 2-digit for soname.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fixes: cba806e07d6f ("build: change ABI versioning to global")
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <
> >>>>> thomas@monjalon.net
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <
> >>>>> bruce.richardson@intel.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This patch contains an alternative fix to that implied by the
> >>>>> previous patches:
> >>>>> http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/63726/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/63728/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>  ABI_VERSION         | 2 +-
> >>>>>  drivers/meson.build | 4 ++--
> >>>>>  lib/meson.build     | 4 ++--
> >>>>>  mk/rte.lib.mk       | 5 ++++-
> >>>>>  4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Acked-by: Luca Boccassi <
> >>>> bluca@debian.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you! I've set a reminder in my calendar for September to
> >>>> revert
> >>>> it :-)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Lol, don't forget to put another reminder to fix things properly
> >>> then too.
> >>> :-)
> >>>
> >>> We also still need consensus in the community as to whether to take
> >>> this
> >>> approach or to do a re-spin of 19.11. At this point, I'm swayed by
> >>> your
> >>> arguments and think we should keep compatibility at the cost of a
> >>> little
> >>> pain and weirdness in our .so filenames.
> >>>
> >>> /Bruce
> >>>
> >>
> >> My vote would be for a respin.
> >> We don't yet know what challenges the weirdness or pain will be.
> >> Why we would bother for the sake of a respin?
> >>
> >> Ray K
> > 
> > We already uploaded 19.11 to Debian last week, which means the tarball
> > is in the archive and it's hashsummed and signed:
> > 
> > http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/d/dpdk/dpdk_19.11.orig.tar.xz
> > 
> > (it's in experimental, but the archive is the same)
> > 
> > A respin at this point would make my life not impossible, but quite
> > difficult.
> > 
> > IMHO respins are acceptable within a few hours - two weeks later it's
> > no longer a respin, it's a new version :-)
> > 
> 
> Understood, we are stretching the acceptable terms of a re-spin.
> 
> If the version that is in the archive fundamentally broken, what are you going to do.
> This is not a relatively easy circumstance that we can simply fix it with an apt-get update.
> 
> Is there precedent for pulling and re-releasing something that is broken in this way?
> 
The thing is that our existing package is not fundamentally broken, it just
has a wrong ABI version, which we can work around with a non-massive
amount of work. Given we have a fix that avoids any respinning, I see no
reason not just to go with it, and keep our ABI compatibility promise.

And I, too, have already uploaded a new build recipe, including package
checksums, to the FreeBSD ports collection. Respinning would be awkward
there too.

/Bruce

  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-12 15:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-11 10:26 Bruce Richardson
2019-12-11 11:04 ` Luca Boccassi
2019-12-11 11:08   ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-12-11 11:14     ` Bruce Richardson
2019-12-11 11:19       ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-12-12 11:07         ` Ray Kinsella
2019-12-11 11:11   ` Bruce Richardson
2019-12-11 11:25     ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-12-12 11:14     ` Ray Kinsella
2019-12-12 13:58       ` Luca Boccassi
2019-12-12 14:05         ` Ray Kinsella
2019-12-12 15:08           ` Bruce Richardson [this message]
2019-12-11 11:15 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-12-11 13:14   ` Bruce Richardson
2019-12-11 15:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Bruce Richardson
2019-12-12  8:27   ` David Marchand
2019-12-12  8:57     ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-12-12 11:44       ` Bruce Richardson
2019-12-12 11:59         ` Bruce Richardson
2019-12-12 13:41           ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-12-12 11:58 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Bruce Richardson
2019-12-12 12:30   ` Ray Kinsella
2019-12-12 13:02     ` Bruce Richardson
2019-12-12 15:25       ` Ray Kinsella
2019-12-12 15:34         ` Bruce Richardson
2019-12-12 14:45   ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-12-12 16:34   ` Ray Kinsella
2019-12-13 11:38   ` Neil Horman
2019-12-16 11:21   ` Laatz, Kevin
2019-12-19 12:42   ` David Marchand
2019-12-19 15:19     ` Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191212150856.GD422@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=bluca@debian.org \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=mdr@ashroe.eu \
    --cc=ray.kinsella@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).