From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 27 10:01:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF2F716A421; Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:01:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (pointyhat.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::2b]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 198FC13C4B6; Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:01:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47230C69.8020801@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:01:13 +0200 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: <200710150951.l9F9pUm7026506@repoman.freebsd.org> <200710261141.51639.jhb@freebsd.org> <1193414454.7390.20.camel@opus.cse.buffalo.edu> <200710261224.41369.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200710261224.41369.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Scott Long , src-committers@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net, Andrey Chernov , obrien@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org, Ken Smith Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/locale utf8.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:01:13 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday 26 October 2007 12:00:54 pm Ken Smith wrote: >> On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 11:41 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >>> On Friday 26 October 2007 10:53:47 am David O'Brien wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 05:31:03PM -0400, Ken Smith wrote: >>>>> What we need to try and avoid unless *absolutely* *necessary* is the >>>>> part Scott quoted above - binaries compiled on 6.3-REL should work on >>>>> 6.2-REL unless there was a really big issue and the solution to that >>>>> issue required us to break that. The reason is simple, people should be >>>>> able to continue running 6.2-REL "for a while" and still be able to >>>>> update their packages from packages-6-stable even after portmgr@ starts >>>>> using a 6.3-REL base for the builds >>>> This is news to me. >>>> I've never heard that we're that concerned with forward compatability >>>> even on a RELENG branch. We do not break the ABI for backwards >>>> compatability - in that everything (including kernel modules) that ran on >>>> 6.2 must run on 6.3. >>> Agreed. The solution to the shared /usr/local problem is to use the oldest >>> version for /usr/local. That has always been the case. Forwards >>> compatiblity (what you are asking for) is significantly harder to guarantee >>> since accurately predicting the future isn't much a science. >>> >> Yeah, sorry. I guess I've been a bit grumpy the past couple days and >> over-stated the "*absolutely* *necessary*" part above. It should have >> read "*necessary*", not "*absolutely* *necessary*". >> >> I'd just like us to question if it's necessary here. Is there a good >> enough way to do this without causing the breakage? I sorta liked >> Warren's question. Does this stuff need to be inlined and if not would >> that solution avoid the breakage? > > I can agree that in this instance it would be nice to keep RELENG_7 and HEAD > from diverging too much right now. I was more concerned about there being a > new general policy. Are you really sure you want forwards compat and not > just backwards compat ABI? Our users rely on it, namely the ability to run newer packages compiled against 6-stable on a 6.2-RELEASE system. This is not guaranteed to always work but should not be broken without extremely good reason. Kris