Re: 2.1.118 Tons of oopes
Richard Gooch (rgooch@atnf.csiro.au)
Thu, 27 Aug 1998 23:22:56 +1000
Alan Cox writes:
> > driver. I got real DAMN lucky noticing the warning with the joystick
> > driver - THAT WAS IN THE MAIN KERNEL SOURCES. Considering that the kernel
> > is no where near a zero warning compile, this could easily be lost in
> > the noise.
>
> And if you'd have missed it you'd have found a way to oops a development
> kernel - big deal , want a few more 8)
>
> > structure, then your arguement applies with full force. But, you get
> > random acts of terrorism IN BOTH CASES, whether you put the additional
> > element at the end or in the middle. In the case of the inserted structure
> > element, you get it when the moved functions are improperly referenced.
>
> A binary driver built with symbol versioning won't load across that change.
> If its built without symbol versioning then someone chose to disable
> the very protection that is designed to catch it
>
> This is a development tree. It doesnt have a stable binary API, now instead
> of bitching how about saying "nice Linus thank you for stopping NFS from
> losing data without an error message on NFS file closes" ?
Let me repeat: I don't care about the binary API. I care about the
source API. And that was broken and I haven't seen a reason that
explains just *how* breaking source compatibility conferred some
benefit.
Regards,
Richard....
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html