new upstream tracker (linuxtesting.org)
Andrey Ponomarenko
susanin at ispras.ru
Mon Jun 7 15:56:45 UTC 2010
Hello,
On 06/04/2010 08:59 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Andrey Ponomarenko wrote:
>
>> Taken into account, thanks. Some automatic way to add libraries may be
>> very useful. At the moment all the libraries can be only manually added
>> to the system by the administrator. If you want to add some library to
>> the system than send a request to me or
>> upstream-tracker at linuxtesting.org
>> <mailto:upstream-tracker at linuxtesting.org>
>>
> There are some false positives in your checks. In particular, some
> (actually, most, if not all) of the "new" virtual functions you flag for
> kdelibs are just added reimplementations of virtual functions in a base
> class. Those don't change the layout of the vtable at all, they just replace
> an entry pointing to the function inherited from the base class with an
> entry pointing to the new reimplemented function.
>
Thank you very much for this report. I've fixed a serious bug in the
checker's code relative to this issue.
> Another problem is that e.g. for GTK+, you have a linear sequence including
> development versions, but ABI guarantees are never from one development
> version to the next, but only from one stable version to the next.
> Development versions are only required to be backwards-compatible with the
> previous stable version, as is the next stable version. So the previous
> version in linear sequence is not always the correct reference. (The same
> holds for kdelibs, by the way, but there your table doesn't include
> development versions, making this a non-issue.) A lot of the "breakage"
> reported for GTK+ is actually APIs added in a development branch and
> adjusted before the official release. This is perfectly within the scope of
> GTK+'s API/ABI guarantees.
>
> Kevin Kofler
>
>
--
Andrey Ponomarenko
Linux Verification Center, ISPRAS
web: http://www.linuxtesting.org
More information about the devel
mailing list