From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0489A04F5; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:58:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68225374C; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:58:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com (mail-wr1-f66.google.com [209.85.221.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47921F5 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:58:07 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id y11so2837675wrt.6 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 05:58:07 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:content-transfer-encoding:user-agent:mime-version; bh=i0wbdMc6IB5cTRKqNWhWjfwaK3BJCxlDbBqN73zsqPA=; b=SrR5cCJGahJr4Iwk6/axXsld3b2siw5+Z72onQ0OuiiFrns+n/xWyvwqnxjC+1g75I hNeAN1rqVdBLK2a02qC2VntRAr1md3bBjhwZklDpxHH/uRwRES8zEOdgad20RAO3DruG 79NDpysUoBpC+E2rjZxNDnGE65fc15e1guFYFgF6OdChJELtmUicKYen7EIQuRf+PJ/g +f8bkBU105QOSc/eL+p/v+TWzis7FVvTfuYKsQ6VrEsGHhvxhwGR0DASnIWG6eNYoh2G 9mgk5BUh2ryKKyezoLdiu2C1tKk1B8E21pj953LvCpSE3Q/l+5x9XcMXLFKgy4cim/hl 8GOA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW52VVNY8E1rgWp55jJ4Jp58jGVrttDAJAABFpcM0C7iYTPViW9 DQEXsCGFDUYDSGybZShvPv8CBe3EiI0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzGSRidwK7mKDyMRwMapnBj7dauo2oghcwr1ZrN6PIZd9XRE00zrh5rF1JnrCxw7dXVKtytng== X-Received: by 2002:adf:db41:: with SMTP id f1mr6662322wrj.392.1576159087035; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 05:58:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2a01:4b00:f419:6f00:7a8e:ed70:5c52:ea3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w22sm5934168wmk.34.2019.12.12.05.58.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 12 Dec 2019 05:58:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <0f66d7be024f320198950e1c39bbb323337d7688.camel@debian.org> From: Luca Boccassi To: Ray Kinsella , Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net, ray.kinsella@intel.com, ferruh.yigit@intel.com Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:58:05 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: <20191211102642.983579-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20191211111148.GA407@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5-1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: fix soname info for 19.11 compatiblity X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thu, 2019-12-12 at 11:14 +0000, Ray Kinsella wrote: >=20 > 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. > > > >=20 > > > > 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. > > > >=20 > > > > Fixes: cba806e07d6f ("build: change ABI versioning to global") > > > >=20 > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon < > > > > thomas@monjalon.net > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson < > > > > bruce.richardson@intel.com > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > --- > > > >=20 > > > > This patch contains an alternative fix to that implied by the > > > > previous patches: > > > > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/63726/ > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/63728/ > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > --- > > > > ABI_VERSION | 2 +- > > > > drivers/meson.build | 4 ++-- > > > > lib/meson.build | 4 ++-- > > > > mk/rte.lib.mk | 5 ++++- > > > > 4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > >=20 > > > Acked-by: Luca Boccassi < > > > bluca@debian.org > > > > > > >=20 > > > Thank you! I've set a reminder in my calendar for September to > > > revert > > > it :-) > > >=20 > >=20 > > Lol, don't forget to put another reminder to fix things properly > > then too. > > :-) > >=20 > > 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. > >=20 > > /Bruce > >=20 >=20 > 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? >=20 > 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 :-) --=20 Kind regards, Luca Boccassi