From owner-freebsd-current Fri Oct 16 09:58:38 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA23206 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:58:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA23201 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:58:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA00831; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:02:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199810161702.KAA00831@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Darren Whittaker cc: Mike Smith , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, john.young@openmarket.com Subject: Re: problem in 3.0 In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:45:28 MDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:02:05 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Mike Smith wrote: > > > > We compile on: > > > BSDI BSD/OS 2.0 > > > > > > We link shared. > > > > Ok, sounds like you're being bitten by incompatibilities between our C > > library and theirs. The best way to work around this will be to link > > static - your program will start and run faster, and as a bonus you'll > > have a much better chance of running on both BSD/OS and FreeBSD systems. > > > > We do our best to maintain binary compatibility with BSD/OS at the > > kernel level, but at the library level it's just a bit too hard. ... > We just linked our code using static but they still won't work on the 3.0 > system. That's interesting. Building the code on a 3.0 system results in a working binary, but a fully-static binary built on BSD/OS 2.x doesn't work correctly? Can you please file a PR describing this, and if possible include a uuencoded standalone BSD/OS binary that demonstrates the problem, as well as source for it? It would also be interesting to know if the code built on a FreeBSD 2.2.x system and ran properly on a FreeBSD 3.0 system. It may be that this would be a workable migration path for you? > We are concerned that our freeBSD customers are going to have > problems with our working software when they upgrade from 2.x to 3.x. At this point, you should recommend your 2.x customers to move to 2.2.8 in November if they go anywhere, and then to the next 3.0.x release in 1Q99. We would expect to be able to resolve this issue well before the next 3.0-based release. Alternatively, consider offering a FreeBSD native binary to your customers; if the build on 2.2.7 works correctly on 3.0, this will give you a stable platform to work from for some time. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message