Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 10:34:26 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: tom@uniserve.com (Tom) Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Make this a relese coordinator decision (was Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued) Message-ID: <199708041734.KAA04347@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970803193617.5004C-100000@shell.uniserve.com> from "Tom" at Aug 3, 97 07:47:00 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> No. We are talking about application level stuff here. Unless you are > changing an API, how could you break applications? The mount API has changed. So long as there are applications (lsof is a good example; traceroute is another; host is another; dig is another; identd is another...) which grovel kernel memory, then the kernel structures *are* part of the API. This annoys the piss out of me, but that's the way it is, and as long as that's the way it is, it's a problem for ports. > Why? Mainly due to difference in bsd.port.mk, and "install" (grew some > new flags in 2.2). Many of the ports will build on 2.1 with a new > "install" and bsd.port.mk. It is easy to predict that changes to > bsd.port.mk and "install" ports. I disagree. The .mk changes forced me to go to a new ld forced me to go to a new crt0.o/ld.so, forced me to go to a new as forced me to go to a new gcc. A royal pain in the ass, and entirely unpredictable. 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?199708041734.KAA04347>