On Mon, 08 Jun 2015, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
[...]
> I have not seen the output of abicheck (I use
abi-compliance-checker
> personally but I guess abidiff is as good).
It's abidiff :-)
> However, I'm not sure about which changes which are not
breakages you
> mean? I'm not aware of ABI changes which do not break users of
> libraries.
Alexander Bokovoy <abokovoy(a)redhat.com> a écrit:
Adding new functions to ABI constitute changes that don't break
existing
users as long as previously available data structures are not
affected.
Yes.
Though, in this particular case, you can invoke "abidiff" in a way that
makes it not mention these new function additions.
You can, for instance, invoke it in a way that makes it show only the
exported functions/variables that got removed, as well as those
functions/variables for which sub-types have changed in their
signatures.
These have more chance to be ABI related issues. The "interesting" case
in my opinion is when the functions/variables have sub-type changes
which doesn't cause any underlying ELF symbol name change. It's usually
In those cases that we might need a qualified user to review "the abi
diff" to tell if it constitutes an ABI breakage or not.
Cheers,
--
Dodji