On 12/17/10 11:11 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
>
>> It could work that way if the upstream developers of the thousands of
>> included projects understood the need for backwards compatibility to keep
>> things working. They don't.
>
> While fine in theory this wouldn't work in real life since they would have to
> be backwards compatible not only for their official features but also for
> bugs/quirks/unintended features.
>
> So even if those thousands of upstream projects managed to remain (from their
> perspective) perfectly backwards compatible things would still break.
>
> Not to mention the need to break backwards compatibility once in a while to
> move projects along (read: major versions).
That 'need' kind of depends on how bad your original interface designs were.
How much has the kernel needed to break from either Posix or the SysVr4 spec?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
