On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 08:35:08PM +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> 1: Long-term ABI for applications that we don't want to break without > >> significant discussion. > >> For now, this will include the stable kernel and libc ABIs > > > > Please define what you mean by "stable kernel ABI". Do you mean the > > kernel <-> userspace syscall ABI? If you mean anything other than that > > I really don't think it's going to work. > > This means "whatever the Linux kernel project says is their stable > ABI". It was not at all intended to expand the ABI boundary. The only really guaranteed stable ABI the kernel exports is the syscall/ioctl interface, and to a lesser extent the proc/sysfs ABI. Kernels in rawhide do differ from what we end up shipping in releases, because they are continually rebased during the merge window/rc phase, wherein it's entirely possible that a new interface is refined. We've had situations for example where a new syscall added during the merge window has had additional parameters added/existing ones changed during -rc phase. This hasn't been a problem because typically, nothing relies upon an interface in unreleased kernels, but we need to make it clear here that nothing in new interfaces is frozen until a .0 release, in case people start thinking "you shipped it in rawhide, so it must be stable". Dave -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
