[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian concordance

On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 11:35:21AM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:

> > The fact is that Hoary *was* binary compatible (in both directions) with
> > both sarge and sid when it was released.  Later, the Debian glibc
> > maintainers and release managers considered changing the ABI in order to fix
> > a bug.  In the course of a lengthy discussion[0], including expression of
> > concerns about inter-distribution compatibility, they weighed the options
> > and decided to go ahead with it.  I fully support their decision, and I do
> > not consider the resulting incompatibility to be a significant obstacle to
> > the continuing growth and success of either Debian or Ubuntu.  Presumably,
> > neither did they.

> I wasn't even aware of the sarge/hoary incompatibility till it came up
> in this thread. And, based on what you and others have said, I'd agree
> it wasn't your fault, though it was certainly unfortunate.

> I'm more worried about the future; and I still haven't seen anyone
> address my initial question, which is why Ubuntu is tracking sid on core
> things like libc in the first place. The value you add is around
> the edges with stuff like X.org and GNOME 2.10. I'd like to see you do
> that in a manner that promotes compatibility with sarge, just as we're
> doing at Progeny as we move forward in these same areas. But I certainly
> understand why you want to move forward in these areas.. I do as well.

Is Progeny interested in working with other Debian (+Ubuntu) folks to
solve the fundamental limitations of the shlibs system that cause sarge and
hoary to be incompatible due to a single-symbol difference, and that will
cause similar breakage in the other direction with sarge and breezy?

> If there's ever been or ever will be a perfect time for Debian and
> Ubuntu to sync up, it's now. Sarge is out, and there is significant
> momentum within the project behind the idea of fixing the release cycle
> problem, so it seems likely that etch will be out in some predictable
> and reasonable amount of time. Why not take advantage of that? Better
> yet, why not help make it happen? Why not, for example, work with
> Debian on putting together a plan for migrating to GCC 4 rather than
> just plowing ahead on your own? Going it alone is sure to cause
> compatibility problems that make the current ones pale by comparison.

... going it alone, like when Matthias Klose ran his plans for the gcc 4
transition past the Debian release team before implementing it in Ubuntu,
and is now proceeding to implement the same transition in Debian?

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: