Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:02:08 -0400
To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: Introducing slight binary incompatibility in newer executables?
Message-ID: <20000626120208.A1744@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
References: <20000626153743 DOT 15312 DOT qmail AT web115 DOT yahoomail DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <20000626153743.15312.qmail@web115.yahoomail.com>; from earnie_boyd@yahoo.com on Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 08:37:43AM -0700

On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 08:37:43AM -0700, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>--- DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>> 
>> > IMHO, it is, any cygwin-app that is updated now, will have to have
>> > the updated cygwin1.dll.  What other changes are you thinking of?
>> 
>> We bump the middle number when the converse is true - when updating
>> the DLL means you *must* update the cygwin apps also.
>> 
>> All we're doing with this change is the same thing we've been doing
>> with all our other changes - adding functionality.  This means that
>> apps built for the new DLL won't work with older DLLs.
>> 
>> If we change or remove functionality, *then* we bump the middle
>> number, because apps build for the old DLL won't work with the new
>> DLL.  It's only when backward compatibility is broken do we have to
>> worry about migration.
>
>Ok.  But, IMO, we need a 1.1.4 before this modification so that we can take
>advantage of Corinna's patches for the speed issues of ntsec.  Then 1.1.5 will
>contain this modification.

The new DLL still handles old binaries so I don't think there is any reason to
hold off.

cgf