Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 09:35:52 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: gallatin@cs.duke.edu Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Smarter kernel modules? Message-ID: <20030306.093552.04191775.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <15975.26321.697361.250384@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> References: <20030306030852.GA1158@edgemaster.zombie.org> <20030305.214439.00238175.imp@bsdimp.com> <15975.26321.697361.250384@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <15975.26321.697361.250384@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> writes:
: My company ships a binary driver ("ethernet" network, and character
: device) built on 4.1.1-R, and it has continued to work at least until
: 4.7-R. I'd like to see that same level of ABI stability throughout
: the 5-STABLE branch.
I'd like to see that too, which is one reason that I'd want a simple,
rarely incremented single number. Make it too easy to bump the
number, and you get into the mess you have with Linux and complain
about. We already have versioning issues with the current modules
system we have, but experience over the past two releases has shown
that nobody uses it.
Also, this isn't anti-foot shooting for -current. On -current you
live with the pain, and like it. current module writers haven't been
able to bump version reliably in the past 5 years, and I don't think
that something magical is going to happen to make them do it now.
This is for the production side of FreeBSD, not the bleeding edge.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030306.093552.04191775.imp>