[Zlib-devel] zlib 1.2.3.5 available for testing

[Dmitry V. Levin]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 09:25:14PM -0800, Mark Adler wrote:
> On Jan 28, 2010, at 8:56 AM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > Actually, a few symbols were added in zlib-1.2.3.3.tar.gz, too:
> > 
> > --- zlib.map
> > +++ zlib.map
> > @@ -46,6 +46,11 @@
> > } ZLIB_1.2.2.3;
> > 
> > ZLIB_1.2.3.3 {
> > +    adler32_combine64;
> > +    crc32_combine64;
> > +    gzopen64;
> > +    gzseek64;
> > +    gztell64;
> >     inflateUndermine;
> > } ZLIB_1.2.2.4;
> 
> Dmitry,
> 
> Thanks, I have added those.
> 
> However those are only there for the user of zlib.h if _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE is defined.

configure adds _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE automatically to CFLAGS/SFLAGS when
off64_t type is available, so it is going to be defined on every modern
GNU/Linux system.

> So I'm not sure if it is correct to add those to zlib.map.

It is correct.  Otherwise these new symbols would go to unversioned
interface, which should contain only those symbols that were provided
by zlib-1.1.4.

> Does someone who makes use of zlib.map know if adding those makes sense?

I tested this change.  Without it, these 5 symbols are unversioned:
$ readelf -Ws libz.so.1.2.3.7 |fgrep gzopen64
    60: 00005fc0    26 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   12 gzopen64
With the change applied, they are properly versioned:
$ readelf -Ws libz.so.1.2.3.7 |fgrep gzopen64
    60: 00005fc0    26 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   12 gzopen64@@ZLIB_1.2.3.3


-- 
ldv
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://madler.net/pipermail/zlib-devel_madler.net/attachments/20100129/0eb3c2df/attachment.sig>