On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 03:45:46PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 12:00:23AM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 02:24:28PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Because if you have to have udev push the names back into the kernel,
> > > why not just ask udev in the first place what they were?
> >
> > Because there is no reason to think udev of 2008 will be compatible
> > with today's udev given udev's history. And that's provided udev is
> > still in use at that time.
>
> Just like gnome and kde of 2008 will not be compatible with the gnome
> and kde of today.
If history is a guide, it will. KDE is harder because the C++ as
implemented in gcc has changed in the meantime, so things that were
correct-ish two years ago aren't anymore and the libraries aren't
binary-compatible with the older gccs, but in the gtk/gnome case I
have programs I wrote in 1999 that still compile and work as is. And
in the X case, I have programs from before linux existed that still
compile and work as is. So I'm not sure what your point is here.
> > > Again, use HAL, not udev for this stuff. FC3 is also out of date for
> > > lots of things becides udev, so why refer to it?
> >
> > Because it proves you don't give a shit about backwards compatibility.
>
> *plonk*
Truth hurts?
OG.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
