> > Hi,
> > for some reason I didn't get the original message.
> Was not to linux-hams ..
And not on dev-hams, either.
Nice thing to observe existing interfaces change with just a small
notice ommiting _how_ this is going to happen.
Could you please post it here?
> > Anyway, we have this thing as a documented feature and we're now stuck
> > with it for at least a while. Simply breaking existing code and saying
> > "your problem, recompile" is outright arrogant and causes a lot of
> > headache for those people who need to switch between different kernel
> > versions from time to time.
>
> We're talking about 2.3.*/upcoming 2.4.* kernels remember ?
> I don't suppose 2.4 kernels to work well with 2.2 distros (same as
> 2.0/2.2)
They have to, at least the applications. User has a 2.2.x based
dist, upgrades to kernel 2.4.x. He's probably aware that he has to
upgrade system utilities. If at all. But breaking applications is a
different thing. Joe user will not understand why his formerly perfectly
running application suddenly fails.
This is bad, especially if it just for the sake of some useless
statistical data. Furthermore it is a nightmare for distribution
vendors and users and will put Linux into a bad light.
The correct thing to do is slowly phasing it out. Keep it around for at
least one unstable and stable kernel series and printk() a warning that it
will go away. And take care that when it is gone old applications will
die gracefully (_not_ randomly core dump).
We even may get the new structure into 2.4.x, regardless if Matthias'
patch gets in or not.
We should start phase out "struct sockaddr_ax25" now, BTW. We're
carrying this thing with us for too long now and I doubt any application
still uses it. I don't know if it even works nowadays.
> > Besides, you won't get it past Linus anyway.
> Well there are some parts in current kernel AX25 I'm wondering how they
> got there :)
Because a program is something that evolves. The code is designed after
the SDL diagrams and glued to the rest of the networking code with an
ever-changing interface. The worst thing is the transmition of IP
datagrams through the arp mechanism, but it was the only possible solution
to conform to the device driver model at the time it was written.
Anyway, apart from tools that monitor AX.25 traffic Matthias' patch isn't
supposed to break applications.
Joerg Reuter http://poboxes.com/jreuter/
And I make my way to where the warm scent of soil fills the evening air.
Everything is waiting quietly out there.... (Anne Clark)
PGP signature
