Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 17:07:18 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Scott Long <scott_long@btc.adaptec.com> Cc: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@ofug.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha support.s src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c support.s src/sys/i386/include md_var.h src/sys/i386/isa npx.c src/sys/ia64/ia64 support.s src/sys/powerpc/powerpc bcopy.csr Message-ID: <XFMail.20030407170718.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030405122406.GB36962@hollin.btc.adaptec.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05-Apr-2003 Scott Long wrote: > On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 01:31:03PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: >> Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> writes: >> > The main problem with the commit is not mentioned in its log message: >> > changing bzero from a function pointer back to a function breaks >> > binary compatibility of many modules. >> >> I am aware of that... >> >> > In defence of this, 5.0 breaks >> > binary compatibility of most modules for other reasons. >> >> which is precisely why I took the liberty of doing it now, before 5.x >> goes -STABLE. >> > > As I've scolded others, changes to HEAD that change the ABI and/or API > should be preceded by an email to re@. Please re-read the many emails > about the semi-frozen state of HEAD for futher guidance. > > I'm not terribly thrilled by this change, but I'm not going to ask for a > backout right now. Eh? We agreed on arch@ a while back that ABI breakage in 5.0 post 5.0-RELEASE was ok and that the ABI "freeze" wouldn't be until RELENG_5 was branched. The topic was actually posed by Robert Watson as he wants to change MAC over to using m_tag before RELENG_5 IIRC. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20030407170718.jhb>