On 09/03/2017 11:30 AM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
>
> The SONAME bump would only be required for OS/400 and VMS as far as I
> can tell (those are the systems specifically mentioned we created
> test1135 for). I think it is very important to not bump it for the
> systems that don't need to bump it. SONAME bumps are sensitive things.
>
This is what I meant, since this is only entry points addition (not
removal).
> I'm interested in discussing this issue with someone who builds/uses
> VMS or OS/400 but I suspect we don't have an overy large amount of
> such users hanging out on this list.
>
I have some ideas about how this can be done on OS/400 (maybe based on a
new file similar to symbols-in-versions, but for entry points) , but no
mean to test it. In addition, OS/400 EBCDIC wrappers as well as ILE/RPG
binding should be upgraded with the new functions, but again, I'm not
anymore in a position to do it myself.
> Now, since we've already disabled 1135 I think we should also move out
> Johannes' multissl-function prototype from multi.h since it was put
> there only to not break 1135. I'll make a separate PR for that.
>
Yes. Reenabling 1135 and soname bump should probably be done in a single
commit. If you tell me when the multissl function has been moved to its
place in curl.h, I can work on 1135 and soname.

Patrick
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: https://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette: https://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2017-09-03