[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?
From: |
Werner Koch |
Subject: |
Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6? |
Date: |
Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:38:24 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:14, address@hidden said:
> That's a nice question. This API is mostly interesting to people
> who are porting gnutls to another crypto library. We might
An API is an API, is an API. You need to make clear which functions are
part of the API and which are not. The usual way to do this in GNU and
most other FS programs is to either prefix the names with an underscore
or have somthing like "_private_" as part of the function name.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
- ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Andreas Metzler, 2011/02/17
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2011/02/17
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Andreas Metzler, 2011/02/18
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2011/02/19
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?,
Werner Koch <=
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2011/02/19
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Simon Josefsson, 2011/02/19
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2011/02/19
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Werner Koch, 2011/02/20
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Simon Josefsson, 2011/02/21
- Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2011/02/21
Re: ABI breakage in 2.10.4 --> 2.11.6?, Werner Koch, 2011/02/18