Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 13:43:45 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@trout.sri.MT.net> To: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert), jkh@freefall.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Binary compatibility with NetBSD Message-ID: <199502272043.NAA07000@trout.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) "Re: Binary compatibility with NetBSD" (Feb 27, 11:33am)
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> If you could give me a detailed list of what you don't like about the > NetBSD libraries (other than their origin) and what you think would > be broken so that I can ensure compatability, I think everyone could > be made happy. I like to know *what* happens to source code that I'm responsible for (kind of the reason we have source code control software), it is a necessity to know *what* changes have been made, and why they were made. No one is a perfect programmer, and subtle bugs may crop up soon after a change is made to a library routine that in unanticipated (or at a unspecified later date). W/out the reasoning for the change and a detailed description of what the change was, we are *relying* on the NetBSD folks to fix 'bugs' in their software. Relying on someone who at times you have an antagonistic relationship with and who has no reason to fix your bugs in such a critical component of the distribution is pure foolishness. When changes are made to our libraries that mirror those made in the NetBSD libraries (with attributions and explanations) then we are less dependant on those folks to make fixes, and can do a much better job of tracking down the problems that *will* occur. Replacing the FreeBSD libraries w/out history is something I will oppose vehemently. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199502272043.NAA07000>