Messages in this thread | | | From | (Alan Cox) | Subject | Re: Kernel interface changes (was Re: cdrecord problems on recent Linux versions) | Date | Thu, 4 Feb 1999 01:07:44 +0000 (GMT) |
| |
> OK, I'll look with the assumtion that nothing should have changed in mind.
Let me know what you find
> The worry is that kernel developers are not paying much attention to > these sorts of 'bugs'; they don't consider these changes to be a > problem. I'm glad that my main immediate concern was possibly > unfounded, but the content of the flame still stands.
This addressed to the kernel developers who dropped the attempt to merge message queue improvements to 2.2 because it was causing compatibility complexities ?
I think everyone tries to avoid stuff like that. Internal to kernel stability is very hard to do. External API's should _never_ need to become incompatible, at worst they will bite incorrectly coded programs tht perhaps assume a reserved field will end up zero.
> 5.3 was riddled with bounds bugs that didn't get fixed until 5.4.
Actually the RH tree had all the security holes fixed. I never had good experience with 5.3+linxuthreads and since this code ticks over nicely in glibc Im inclined to assume 5.3 had bugs there.
Alan
- 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.tux.org/lkml/
| |