> I'd like API stability, if API stability is > achieved, ABI is there. this is a joke right? If you really think this you have no idea what ABI stability means and how extremely hard it is to even sort of remotely approach it. Trust me. It's *extremely* hard to impossible. Several security fixes can only be fixed this way. And it's REALLY fragile even if for other fixes. And I am very glad that the linux kernel people in general decide to not go for abi stability, the hacks that would be needed would be so obscene and the gains very very minimal. (it's open source, you have the source after all!)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: "Franco \"Sensei\"" <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- References:
- [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: "Franco \"Sensei\"" <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: "Franco \"Sensei\"" <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: "Franco \"Sensei\"" <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: Krzysztof Halasa <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: "Franco \"Sensei\"" <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: David Lang <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: "Franco \"Sensei\"" <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: David Lang <[email protected]>
- Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- From: "Franco \"Sensei\"" <[email protected]>
- [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH encrypted swsusp 1/3] core functionality
- Next by Date: Re: Kernel module_list
- Previous by thread: Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- Next by thread: Re: [INFO] Kernel strict versioning
- Index(es):