Re: [DynInst_API:] commit: assorted fixes, pre-9.0.4

[Bill Williams <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/20/2015 06:57 AM, Barton Miller wrote:
> We can certainly turn this into a regular release instead of a point 
> release.
> Bill: do you want to upgrade this release?  Or pull this feature out 
> of the point release?  Or argue for another approach?
I definitely want to get the bug fixes officially released ASAP (this 
week/early next). I think it's probably best to pull this out of 9.0.4 
and get both a 9.0 and 9.1 topic branch going.
--bw

> --bart
>
>
> On 10/19/2015 6:22 PM, Josh Stone wrote:
> > On 10/19/2015 02:43 PM, Bill Williams wrote:
> > > * Shared libraries are now consistent with executables: .o files are
> > > modules/mapped_modules, and they are contained in 
> > > objects/mapped_objects.
> > How are dynamic library callbacks working under this?  We talked about
> > changing this to report BPatch_object, but you can't really do that
> > without breaking API and ABI.
> >
> > > If you're using BPatch_module, BPatch_object, Symtab::Module, or
> > > Symtab::Object on shared libraries, *please* test this out and let me
> > > know what interfaces on the object classes should be there and aren't
> > > (and whether this change is a horrible backwards compatibility 
> > > breaker).
> > Please don't try to balance horribleness -- just don't break at all
> > without exceptional justification.  Looking at the public header
> > changes, I don't think there's anything here that can't wait until the
> > next soname.  If you're itching badly, bring on 9.1 sooner.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dyninst-api mailing list
> > Dyninst-api@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/dyninst-api
> _______________________________________________
> Dyninst-api mailing list
> Dyninst-api@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/dyninst-api