Re: Radical idea, test backwards compatibility instead of recompile
Ben Collins <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> You people are missing one important bit of information. libc.so.6 is
> perfectly backward compatible.
Perfectly!? Wow, I think TeX was the last piece of software to make that
claim and it was only after years of testing. You're ready to claim that after
24 hours of testing. Amazing.
What I'm suggesting is that we learn a different lesson from the libdb
breakage. The general reaction has been to run around recompiling packages to
work around a broken bit of backwards compatibility. Now that we've determined
that it was the backwards compatibility that failed I'm suggesting we revert
those mistaken unnecessary recompiles and actually test that glibc is
backwards compatible. Instead of going on faith that it's "perfect".