Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 01:38:51 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: imp@village.org (Warner Losh) Cc: alk@Think.COM, current@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: We need to do another XFree86 release for -current someday soon.. Message-ID: <199603300838.BAA07043@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199603300400.VAA07310@rover.village.org> from "Warner Losh" at Mar 29, 96 09:00:25 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> : > Why do ns_addr() and iso_addr() have to go? What's the big deal? > : > : Because the network address families they supported are no longer > : shipped, and thus they won't compile any more. > : > : Please, that isn't good enough to justify the cost. Stub them to > : return errors. > > When they were removed, it was because no one was using them. > However, now everyone is impacted by having to build new binaries. If > this is the only reason, it seems that it would be better to stub them > out (since no one will notice if no one is using them) and not bumpt > the major rev of the shared libaries. If no one was truly using them, instead of this being just an opinion, then no one would be impacted by their removal even if the version number is not bumped. To argue that the version number needs bumped is to argue against their removal. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603300838.BAA07043>