From: Thorsten Kranzkowski (terhi.victor@logonet.com)
Date: Thu Feb 03 2000 - 04:48:52 EET
On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 12:55:51PM +1100, Craig Small wrote:
> Thorsten Kranzkowski said:
> > distribution. They will get a new Kernel _along_ with matching application
> > software.
>
> As someone who used to maintain the ax25-tools and the ax25-kernel for
> one distribution, I cannot fully explain the NIGHTMARE something like
> this does to the distros.
>
> Sure, sometimes you just have to do it, but make sure that this sort
> of binding the tools to the kernel sort of thing is really needed and
> worth the extra pain that it will cause.
I agree. This would suggest to do known-to-break-things modifications at
once (or very close together) and not scatter them for a longer time.
> > If you already have glibc, then a new kernel is no problem!
> Binding a tool to a library version is usually ok because people who
> compile their own libc are quite rare. But most people compile their own
I do :)
> kernel. The distribution's dependency systems can handle libraries.
>
> Quite often the kernel falls out of the dependencies system so there
> is no guarantee about what is installed, let alone running. That's when
I think one can assume nobody installs an older kernel than the distro-
supplied one. The original question was whether new _userspace_ tools/apps
should support _older_ kernel API. Or did I get that wrong :-) ?
> wierdness starts to happen.
I understand your reasoning.
73 Thorsten
-- | Thorsten Kranzkowski Internet: zvow@uccs.edu | | Mobile: ++49 161 7210230 Snail: Niemannsweg 30, 49201 Dissen, Germany | | Ampr: dl8bcu@db0lj.#rpl.deu.eu, ibczkwd@kerailya.tunkki.fi [44.130.8.19] |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 03 2000 - 11:03:16 EET