From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Oct 9 11:51:16 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0431C15951 for ; Sat, 9 Oct 1999 11:51:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA52835; Sat, 9 Oct 1999 11:50:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199910091850.LAA52835@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: merging current's jail functionality to stable In-Reply-To: <37FF5DB5.E52985A2@scc.nl> from Marcel Moolenaar at "Oct 9, 1999 05:22:29 pm" To: marcel@scc.nl (Marcel Moolenaar) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 11:50:59 -0700 (PDT) Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Jacques Vidrine wrote: > > > These patches change the interface of suser(9). All uses of > > suser in the source tree have been updated, but 3rd-party KLDs, > > at least, would be broken by this change. > > > > As I see it, there are these options: > > = Damn the binary compatibility. Go ahead and commit it. > > Inform any known vendors about the change and encourage > > them to make the trivial updates needed. > > This is not an option. I disagree, binary compatibility has continuously been broken in -stable, why is it now suddenly ``not an option''. We had to redoply 2 times during our attempt to beta test 3.3 due to changes in binary compatibility in less than a 14 day period!! -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message