Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2006 06:12:33 -0600 From: Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> To: "John Hay" <jhay@meraka.org.za> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: compat6x Message-ID: <2fd864e0612030412s290de4cqa9db5feac41b379b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20061203090310.GA23213@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za> References: <456E5DAB.10608@FreeBSD.org> <457160A3.5060209@gmail.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0612021037430.9206@sea.ntplx.net> <20061203061615.GA15517@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za> <4572834B.80500@FreeBSD.org> <20061203090310.GA23213@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/3/06, John Hay <jhay@meraka.org.za> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:56:59PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > > John Hay wrote: > > > But even in all those other threads, never had there been a decent > > > answer why it is good to have two incompatible libraries with the same > > > number. It can only cause hurt. > > > > No one has said that it won't be changed, only that it won't be > > changed right this minute. It's ok if you don't understand all the > > technical points that were made in the previous threads (I don't > > understand them all either). But what you should realize is that this > > is -current, and sometimes stuff breaks. If you can't deal with that, > > run RELENG_6. Sorry to be so direct about it, but seriously ... > > Yes I can run something else than -current... I should also be able > to lobby for something if it looks like it can be better? > > I understand that there is churn (especially in the libs) in -current. > I don't have anything against it. > > I know the lib version numbers will be bumped. I'm happy with it. > > I'm just trying to reason that it should first be the version number > bump and then the lib churn. > > For the guy that have all the source and regularly recompile everything, > there is no change and he can still do that. What it does buy us, is that > RELENG_6 apps stay working and if people have apps that they do not have > the source for, they can still use it. > > It doesn't seem so unreasonable to just swap the order of things that > have to be done in any case? Or is unreasonable? > > John > The problem with this idea, among other things, is that at times, during the development of -CURRENT, you'd be bumping libs every few hours. Since its impossible to garuntee that a lib will remain compatible, under all circumstances, its only handled as a best effort thing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2fd864e0612030412s290de4cqa9db5feac41b379b>