Linked by Thomas Leonard on Tue 16th Jan 2007 00:32 UTC
Permalink for comment 202162
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-08-02
This week seems to be about porting problems from the windows world to the FOSS world. First backward compatibility and now binary compatibility. They are only problems to people who want the latest and greatest.
Maybe that's because on Windows backward compatibility and binary compatibility are solved problems, on Linux they're not.
Write and compile a program on Windows Vista using only functions available in Windows 95, then take it to a Windows 95 box, and it will work.
Now compile on glibc 2.4 using only ANSI C functions, take your program to a box with glibc 2.3 and it will fail to start, even though all the functions you use are available. And that's not even going to horrors like thread-local locales, where it won't even work on another libc of the same version compiled without that option, and Fedora Core 6's GCC's DT_GNU_HASH, where unless you compile with special flags, AFAIK your program doesn't even run on any other distro.
It's not that people want the latest and greatest - currently the only reliable way to get unpackaged software installed is to compile it, and ISVs want to write software once and have it work on every distro for all time.
If you know something I don't, please elaborate.