Re: GNOME Namespace Management - ARC & GNOME

 --- Mike Hearn <mike navi cx> wrote: 
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > But I fear that we are talking about simple binary ABI-stability of the
> > GNOME Platform libraries. If SUN has found that they are not ABI-stable
> > then they should be telling us, because we want them to be ABI-stable, and
> > we think they are.
> There were some examples posted earlier, eg:
> I think the issue is that you're using a different definition of stable 
> to what Sun is. Sun mean "backwards compatible", whereas you mean "has 
> the same ABI" which is not the same. It's possible to not break the 
> binary interface but still stop apps from working when they're upgraded, 
> and GTK+ has done this in the past with full knowledge.

Uhh.. Dude, which part of "binary" or "application" you missed in ABI aka 
"application binary compatibility"? If you do an upgrade and you get symbol 
linkage errors then ABI was most definitely broken. Waving hands and saying 
"we said we were ABI compatible and would do only things that don't break 
ABI so this can't really be ABI breakage" doesn't help. Which symbols are 
available from which libraries are for example necessarily part of an ABI - 
trying to pretend otherwise simply makes the problem worse. 

> thanks -mike



ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]