Jean Delvare wrote:
On Mon, 14 May 2007 11:43:45 -0700 (PDT), Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, 14 May 2007, Jean Delvare wrote:
Sure, we don't allow that. Except for xfsprogs in 2.6.1, procps in
2.6.4, oprofile in 2.6.13 and udev in 2.6.19, of course.
And we really complained about it! The oprofile thing should be fixed,
btw, and yeah,if udev breaks any more, I'll have to stop taking patches
from Greg. That thing has been a disaster, and everybody involved should
be ashamed and now hopefully *very* aware of the fact that we don't break
user-level interfaces.
(Right now, I suspect we may have a loop setup regression. Not sure)
While I'm all for keeping things relatively stable and not asking the
user to constantly upgrade user-space, I believe that we just can't
promise to never break user-level interfaces while keeping the
development pace we have right now. We can promise to grant people
significant delay before we drop compatibility options, but "forever"
doesn't scale.
If you really want to enforce the "never" rule, be prepared to either
see development slow down and finally come to a stop, or see the code
become unmaintainable and insecure and nobody is longer willing to work
on it.
Why do you think we -stopped- enforcing such a rule? :)
It's been the rule throughout Linux's history. syscalls from early
Linux binaries should still work, for example.
Jeff
-
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]
