"Although I hate to do it, it looks like we're going to have to slip Fedora Core 5 test3 by a week. There is an ABI change in the gcc/glibc stack that requires a rebuild of the entire distribution. Given that, there is no way that we'll be able to make a freeze date of Monday. So, test3 will now freeze on Monday, 13 February with a release date of Monday, 20 February."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
If there's a market -- and the benefits outweigh the costs. You forgot that second part.
Can you show me a list of companies and accompanying software that is being proted to GNU/Linux "every day"? You seem to know, so is there like a running daily list or something?
Breaking compatibility with old binaries is very much a Linux-only problem, as far as modern OSes are concerned. I can run 90% of Windows 95 software in XP. I can run 75% of OS X 10.2/10.1 software on OS X 10.4, and I can run 75%+ of the software for FreeBSD 3.X+ on FreeBSD 5 or 6.
Without compatibility libraries, I can run 0% of old Linux software on a modern distro.
How's that for backwards compatibility? (By the way, I'm talking about binaries in *all* cases here)
Member since:2005-11-14
Can you show me a list of companies and accompanying software that is being proted to GNU/Linux "every day"? You seem to know, so is there like a running daily list or something?
No, there is no running daily list, but it happens. In case you did not know, lots of companies which do it want to stay below the radar because of fear of MS, so your list is not going to happen now.
Just shows MS is a true break to innovation and to companies.
Breaking compatibility with old binaries is very much a Linux-only problem, as far as modern OSes are concerned
No it's not. You and the other trolls and MS shills that replied the same to this thread are just too stupid to inform yourselves. It's a known fact that no gcc ABI change will break any of your old apps on Linux. It's a known fact that Fedora development version is a testbed (despite what others would like you to believe).
Reading further and informing yourself was too hard. If you did, you would have learned that the change affects only architectures that other OSes you talk about do not support, and that it was only to support some new features they added (related to security, stability and performance).
See ? That's the difference of attitude in the community : some people will ask what it is exactly about. People like you, MS shills and trolls and astroturfers, will just bitch about sth they don't understand right away. Sad really, you are the people we try to shut off, that gives Linux a bad rap.
I can run 90% of Windows 95 software in XP. I can run 75% of OS X 10.2/10.1 software on OS X 10.4, and I can run 75%+ of the software for FreeBSD 3.X+ on FreeBSD 5 or 6
And I can run 100 % of the software I used in 1999 on Linux right now. Yes, 100 %. Even that very old xv that was out before Linux was born, or that fidelio client, or mp3kult, ...
Without compatibility libraries, I can run 0% of old Linux software on a modern distro
You're too confused to understand that a development version of Fedora Core is not Linux.
FYI, what they call compatibility libraries on Linux are mostly old libraries version, and they are there solely for proprietary closed source apps. If you don't want to install them, don't come here saying things like how then your proprietary closed source app won't run, you just look stupid.
How's that for backwards compatibility? (By the way, I'm talking about binaries in *all* cases here)
Being a troll, your case sure enough is not representative of current state of Linux backwards compatibility. The only true area of compatibility problems on Linux are due to binary only drivers. You can make everything else work without problem.
Don't worry, 128 bit long double for s390, sparc, ppc(32,64) won't affect you the least bit.
The fact that Fedora recompile all their distro will bring the improvement to all their included FOSS apps and libs. Your beloved app on Linux you love to troll about (though I still don't know what it is) will work on the next Fedora, but it will not include the improvements, and so will be the shittiest app on your FC5 (it surely already is on FC4). And sure enough, being a troll, you will blame FC for it, and not the vendor.
Member since:
2005-11-14
"The point was that hardware and software companies can't be bothered to write software for Linux if not only kernel updates break it sometimes, but the entire ABI changes. "
No, you're incorrect. If there's a market for software on a platform companies will provide it, even if it means having to support more than one version. That's why more and more companies port their software to GNU/Linux everyday. This is backed up by research done by companies like Red Hat with ISVs.
In this news piece in particular the ABI change is in the gcc/glibc stack. This is not a problem exclusive to "Linux", as other systems use the GNU Compiler Collection too; Mac OS X for example.
Edited 2006-02-14 00:34