Robert Watson wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Andrey Chernov wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 12:05:40PM -0700, LI Xin wrote:
Well, I think the problem is not exposing a new symbol by itself, but
__mb_sb_limit is being used in _ctype.h, in a form of __inline
functions. Therefore, the change will break new binaries running on
older systems.
Yes. Only vice versa compatibility supported.
I think the issue here is that the change occurred very quickly after
the branch, and when users wanted to 'change gears' back to RELENG_7
from HEAD once it was created immediately ran into the problem. It
seems like a useful piece of post-branch advice to developers in the
future will be, "Please don't do things that make switching branches --
back or forward -- for the first few weeks after the branch is
created". In general, I don't think we care about forward
compatibility, but we are currently getting lots of reports because this
is one of those few times where a lot of moving backward happens.
We do care about forward compatibility within STABLE branches, as Ken
and I have discussed in side threads. But yes, forward compat between
major branches is merely desired; i.e. changes will happen, and
hopefully not for gratuitous reasons.
Scott
_______________________________________________
cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
