Re: Tangent discussion w/Dwarf: Re: Potentially serious problem with kernel-headers...
On Mon, Jul 13, 1998 at 03:02:03PM -0400, Monty wrote:
>
> My great fear is this: I can distribute *one* binary that works under
> Solaris. One that works under NetBSD. (We won't talk about AIX or
> IRIX). Do I need to release a multitude for Linux? "This one works
> with 2.0.33, this one with 2.0.34 *unless* you have this patch, in
> which case use this one, unless there's SCSI support in which
> case...."
definitly a valid concern...
>
> If these suspected kernel header changes are a reality, they were in a
> *subminor* release. Not 1.0->2.0. Not 2.0->2.1. 2.0.33->2.0.34.
> That's *crazy*. How the Hell can anyone keep their system stable
> without a full reinstall every month (or never upgrading, which is
> already the choice of most Linux users, including *mine*). What are
> we trying to be? Microsoft Windows? Hell, here's an example where
> Windows is *more* stable than Linux.
I would have to ask what the change actually was that is causing
the problem...
as was stated earlier...under BOTH 2.0.34 and 2.0.33 the program works
when compiled with the 2.0.34 headers (I looked back at earlier messages)
and under 2.0.33 works also with 2.0.33 headers...
this is an interesting problem. What change would cause 2.0.34 headers to be
(in this case) backwards compatible with 2.0.33 but not the other way around?
If this is the case...then compiling with 2.0.34 headers solves the problem
since it works with the older kernels
I know this is only this one case but...I we would like to know what the
actual change that causes this to be the case is before going off
blaming changes in interfaces and calling Windows more stable
than Linux
am I way off base? am I making any sense?
-Steve
--
/* -- Stephen Carpenter <sjc@delphi.com> ------------------------------ */
A favorite quote from a source I forget:
"Only Microsoft can take an algorithim that has been under years of
public scrutiny and weaken it to the point where the entire key space
can be searched in 3 days"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: