> Cdda2wav (By Heiko Eißfeldt [EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > - Now using the major() macro for some Linux duties. > > WARNING to creators of Linux distributions:
As such wording sounds very much as "political statement," I feel necessity to comment on following. > It has _always_ been wrong to compile software only once for different > kernel versions (e.g. for compile Linux-2.4 and later install a > 2.2 kernel on the so created system). I can't find the above statement to hold universally true. I would accept "it has always beed wrong to compile *cdrtools* only once for different kernel versions," but I refuse to accept formulation as broad as above. There is possibility that author's intention *was* to make statement about cdrtools in particular, in which case a clarification note would be appropriate. Meanwhile I can say that I disagree with the above statement in its current wording, because it's perfectly possible to design software for backward binary compatility and even for two-way compatibility. Moreover! Creators of Linux distributions *should* actually strive for at least backward compatibility in maximum possible extent, i.e. programs compiled under elder distribution should work and even be supported under newer release, unless there is stronger reason not to. I mean "it works in latest distribution if recompiled" per se should not be a viable argument, but only "it doesn't work *because* this and that, there is nothing we can do to make [re]compiled binary for elder distribution work under latest distributions, but to recompile it there." Yes, this means that I would very much like to see packages being assembled under eldest possible distribution to provide binary compatibility under latest distribution. This approach stimulates developers to write better code and is the only way to create and maintain trust-worthy foundation which lasts. > Now that Linux-2.6 introduces incompatible changes to kernel/user > interfaces, the resulting binaries will not work correctly anymore. The "political statement" appearence is strengthened by the fact that this issue has no apparent connection with context in which they're brought up, namely switching to major() macro in cdda2wav. I mean as far as calculation of major device number goes, at least 2.4 and 2.6 kernels are two-way binary compatible. Even binary compatibility with 2.2 (once again as far as calculation of major device number goes!) is rather libc issue than kernel one. A. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]