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

Re: 2nd call: binary incompatibility



Ted wrote:
> If we do this kind of workaround, it should obviously be under an
> #ifdef.  However, for some folks such as RedHat, where customers can get
> annoyed with things aren't backwards compatible, it might be a really
> nice feature to have.
> 

Redhat can do what they always do in these situations - run old versions
of stuff. Look at the libc version, not to mention various other things in
the distribution. Redhat will hang on to old sources and patch them if
they don't like the new ones. People who are clued in enough to be on this
list and downloading things that people put up marked as alpha-level code
probably aren't the doing so without knowing what they're doing. Now, if
you put an rpm in contrib of this, then yeah, you'd have some whiners out
of the clueless lot who blindly install everything in contrib. =)

But, as far as what gets put in the distribution, RedHat, I would think,
would wait until they can give you all new pam'd apps, and then release
the whole lot of stuff at once in some sort of bundle. It's a good time to
push for all the new stuff to get done, as redhat is working on their next
distribution right now, and if you can get a new pam out and new apps to
work with it, then the next generation of pam machines will be on the
right track from birth. 

> Remember, if you want to seem to be professional, you have to be
> backwards compatible.  Microsoft understands this; it may result in code
> which is ugly for a while, but it's a real prequisite for general
> success outside of the hacker community.

Though it's a bit off topic, I can't let that M$ comment above go. =)

Heh, do they really do that? IMHO, no... 3 versions of win32..., the "we
wish no one knew that there as more than one version" scam on win95,
win95a, and win95b; newer MS Word's won't save as word 6 properly, 16 bit
support in 95/nt is lousy, etc... I wouldn't say that MS is a very good
example. 

Followups to me if you wanna debate about Microsoft. 

jim



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