Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 17:21:24 -0700 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Xin LI <delphij@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/include string.h src/lib/libc/string Makefile.inc memchr.3 memrchr.c src/sys/sys param.h Message-ID: <483CA584.3080001@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20080527234335.GA24995@owl.midgard.homeip.net> References: <200805272004.m4RK4SZt029194@repoman.freebsd.org> <483C7FF2.6000607@FreeBSD.org> <20080527234335.GA24995@owl.midgard.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 02:41:06PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> Xin LI wrote: >>> delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC >>> >>> FreeBSD src repository >>> >>> Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_6) >>> include string.h >>> lib/libc/string Makefile.inc memchr.3 >>> sys/sys param.h >>> Added files: (Branch: RELENG_6) >>> lib/libc/string memrchr.c >>> Log: >>> MFC: Add memrchr(3). >> I think this is not very good idea to MFC that into stable releases 6.x >> and 7.x. The reason is that configure scripts for some packages might >> detect up this API and enable it. Which means that some binary-only >> packages build for say 6.4 won't work on 6.3 and down. AFAIK, both >> forward and backward compatibility is required (or at least desired?) >> for stable branches. > > No, it isn't. Backwards compatibility (in the sense that stuff that worked > on 6.x should still work on 6.x+1) is largely required unless there is > some very good reason to break compatibility (such very good reasons are > quite rare.) Which reasons are they specifically? I can't think of any. The memrchr() is not something mandated by the C90 and/or POSIX/SUS. Any software that is portable should be able to live without it. -Maxim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?483CA584.3080001>