Several months ago I attempted to upgrade libffi 3.0.10 to 3.0.11. The change was reverted because the soname change in this version of the library broke the build environment. I would still like to get 3.0.11 in Fedora. I don't anticipate any future ABI-breaking changes, and 3.0.12 will include additional ports like Aarch64, which is likely of interest to some Fedora developers. How do we coordinate a rebuild for dependent packages? Also, I assume this will have to wait 'til F18 is out (fine by me), but I'd like to deal with it early in the F19 cycle.
Thanks,
Anthony Green
On 11/2/12 3:18 PM, Anthony Green wrote:
Several months ago I attempted to upgrade libffi 3.0.10 to 3.0.11. The change was reverted because the soname change in this version of the library broke the build environment. I would still like to get 3.0.11 in Fedora. I don't anticipate any future ABI-breaking changes, and 3.0.12 will include additional ports like Aarch64, which is likely of interest to some Fedora developers. How do we coordinate a rebuild for dependent packages? Also, I assume this will have to wait 'til F18 is out (fine by me), but I'd like to deal with it early in the F19 cycle.
It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build -> pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so during the transition we'll need to build both sonames of libffi. It might be worth keeping a compat-libffi around for a release or two anyway, the current soname has a _long_ history.
After that, though, the rebuilds should be pretty straightforward, it looks like all affected source packages are provenpackager+. The caveat might be things like ghc which generate their prov/reqs based on a sha hash of, well, something; if that something includes the list of DT_NEEDED then we might be looking at a rebuild of many more things. But even that should be straightforward if tedious.
- ajax
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build -> pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so during the transition we'll need to build both sonames of libffi. It might be worth keeping a compat-libffi around for a release or two anyway, the current soname has a _long_ history.
Or just apply the patch from here: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-April/165871.html And skip tons of pain for all the libffi consumers at the tiny cost of a stub symbol.
Hm, no links to the patch in the archives. Well, I'll attach it again, since I still have it sitting around in my libffi git checkout.
Colin Walters (walters@verbum.org) said:
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build -> pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so during the transition we'll need to build both sonames of libffi. It might be worth keeping a compat-libffi around for a release or two anyway, the current soname has a _long_ history.
Or just apply the patch from here: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-April/165871.html And skip tons of pain for all the libffi consumers at the tiny cost of a stub symbol.
Hm, no links to the patch in the archives. Well, I'll attach it again, since I still have it sitting around in my libffi git checkout.
And note that whatever you do, F-19 is open for doing it now - you don't need to wait until F-18 ships...
Bill
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:49:01PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Colin Walters (walters@verbum.org) said:
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build -> pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so during the transition we'll need to build both sonames of libffi. It might be worth keeping a compat-libffi around for a release or two anyway, the current soname has a _long_ history.
Or just apply the patch from here: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-April/165871.html And skip tons of pain for all the libffi consumers at the tiny cost of a stub symbol.
Hm, no links to the patch in the archives. Well, I'll attach it again, since I still have it sitting around in my libffi git checkout.
And note that whatever you do, F-19 is open for doing it now - you don't need to wait until F-18 ships...
And has been since August. Development starts when rawhide and F-next branch.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Schedule
-Toshio
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:23:48PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
And has been since August. Development starts when rawhide and F-next branch.
We need some way to put this in bigger letters.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
El Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:04:29 -0400 Adam Jackson ajax@redhat.com escribió:
On 11/2/12 3:18 PM, Anthony Green wrote:
Several months ago I attempted to upgrade libffi 3.0.10 to 3.0.11. The change was reverted because the soname change in this version of the library broke the build environment. I would still like to get 3.0.11 in Fedora. I don't anticipate any future ABI-breaking changes, and 3.0.12 will include additional ports like Aarch64, which is likely of interest to some Fedora developers. How do we coordinate a rebuild for dependent packages? Also, I assume this will have to wait 'til F18 is out (fine by me), but I'd like to deal with it early in the F19 cycle.
It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build -> pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so during the transition we'll need to build both sonames of libffi. It might be worth keeping a compat-libffi around for a release or two anyway, the current soname has a _long_ history.
I am right now building a compat-libffi package that has just the old .so nothing to be built against. so expect that early this week the .so of libffi will be bumped.
Dennis
Dennis wrote:
I am right now building a compat-libffi package that has just the old .so nothing to be built against. so expect that early this week the .so of libffi will be bumped.
Hey, thanks Dennis! I really appreciate this.
I'm hoping to release 3.0.12 soon and get that into the F19 release. Among other things, this include AArch64 support.
Anthony Green
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
El Thu, 17 Jan 2013 06:35:08 -0500 (EST) Anthony Green green@redhat.com escribió:
Dennis wrote:
I am right now building a compat-libffi package that has just the old .so nothing to be built against. so expect that early this week the .so of libffi will be bumped.
Hey, thanks Dennis! I really appreciate this.
I'm hoping to release 3.0.12 soon and get that into the F19 release. Among other things, this include AArch64 support.
Anthony Green
No problem. seemed it was kinda important and needed doing. as long as the soname of 3.0.12 doesnt change it should be simple. aarch64 support will be needed :)
Dennis
devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Adam Jackson -
Anthony Green -
Bill Nottingham -
Colin Walters -
Dennis Gilmore -
Matthew Miller -
Toshio Kuratomi