Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 08:42:33 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, d@delphij.net, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Xin LI <delphij@FreeBSD.org>, re@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: <20080528154233.GG85398@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <483CA944.4050800@FreeBSD.org> References: <200805272004.m4RK4SZt029194@repoman.freebsd.org> <483C7FF2.6000607@FreeBSD.org> <483C977F.20105@delphij.net> <483CA944.4050800@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 05:37:24PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Well, as I said it might not be something strictly required, but why not be > nice to ISVs and users? Ability to run binaries compiled on 6.4 on previous > 6.x releases is really important in many situations. No, it can be quite error prone. > That's probably one > of the reasons why big software vendors (Oracle, Sun etc) are very > reluctant to provide native binary packages for FreeBSD. I really don't think you're giving their justification... Even Sun adds things to Solaris 10 updates. UPWARD binary compatibility is what's guaranteed. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080528154233.GG85398>