Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:52:58 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: We need to do another XFree86 release for -current someday soon.. Message-ID: <199603312152.OAA12006@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199603302314.AAA05356@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Mar 31, 96 00:14:05 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > : Please, that isn't good enough to justify the cost. Stub them to > > : return errors. > > > > i would vote for this too > > Funny, nobody complained back when Garrett did announce his intention. I did, on principle that you should never delete code, and that the code was not intrinsically broken ...it was just an incomplete job of changing some related code that is causing it to not operate. IMO, it is the responsibility of an engineer changing an interface to change the system code using the interface as well. I wouldn't expect a change in the proc structure to get in without a corresponding change in "ps". I didn't complain about libraries because I was unaware that this would cause a library change, rather than an alloable parameter change to some system calls (I assumed the interface was parametric). Now I need to complain about the interface not being parametric. I think the stubs should go in and the version bump can wait for the parameterization, which should make the library not care about the underlying transport code (this will also let someone stick it back in if they need it later without having to invoke arcane rituals on the library to make it work). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603312152.OAA12006>