Date: Sun, 06 Jul 1997 13:32:37 +0200 From: Kent Boortz <kent@erlang.ericsson.se> To: tom@sdf.com Cc: kent@erlang.ericsson.se Subject: Re: Application os version compatibility? Message-ID: <199707061132.NAA29134@townsend.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 5 Jul 1997 20:17:24 -0700 (PDT)" References: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970705200828.12420C-100000@misery.sdf.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thank you Tom, it is more clear to me know but I'm still a bit confused. > The libc version is ONLY changed if the interface changes. If the > interface changes, some applications will not work. Hence, the version > number change. Do you talk about "system calls" like read/write? Or the interface from the library to the user, like fread/fwrite? > Huh? Statically linked applications ALWAYS work. Could it be the case that a new system call is added from FreeBSD X.X.1 to X.X.2 and for example a new libc.a implement fopen() with this new call? Then running even statically linked applications compiled in X.X.2 running on X.X.1 will break, right? Do the behaviour of system calls *ever* change change in an incompatible way? > Statically link it, and it will work on any version, or > dynamically link it to the oldest good release (probably 2.1.7), and 2.2 > users can install the 2.1 compat package (basically just a copy of > libc.2.2). This will solve the problem I describe above, good idea, thanks. (even though I hate to install an old 2.1.7 on my system just to be able to compile ;-) > It is foolish to make binary-only releases to support an unreleases > os version. There will be other libraries than 'libc' in this application. What I'm after is that if I compile and release a 2.2.2 version and an unreleased 2.2.3 shows up that "there is a good chance" it will work. No guarantee of cause, I may have to do a new release or give instruction how to use a compatibility package or something. The sad thing is that when the user starts the application and he get lots of warnings or it refuses to run he will blame me ;-) or think the product is crap. It doesn't help if the release note says 2.2.2, he runs 2.2.3 and expect it to work I want a FreeBSD version of our free non-commercial version of the product we develop (Erlang, a development system for concurrent and distributed applications) and want FreeBSD look like a "good option" to Solaris that is mostly used by our customers. Thats why I try to understand how I make binary distributions the best way and how and how well new releases are handled in this respect by the FreeBSD group. > It really is quite simple. For you maybe ;-) Thank you for your reply, /kgb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199707061132.NAA29134>