>James C. McPherson wrote: >> Ben Rockwood wrote: >>> I've had a couple applications have assorted strange problems on >>> recent Nevada builds. One of the applications was the LiteSpeed Web >>> Server, and the response from LiteSpeed regarding the problem was >>> that an ABI change broke compatibility with existing Solaris8/9 X86 >>> 32 bit binaries. >>> >>> Is this true or false? I can't find any evidence of such a change, >>> but I might be overlooking something. Can anyone comment? >> >> I would be incredibly surprised if this claim was true. >> Have you asked them for proof? > >Knowing which interface changed would be important. Either because it must >be fixed, or (more likely) because they're using less-than Committed >interfaces.
Or they relied on undocumented behaviour or we broke something as a side effect of a bug fix. Is the problem also with S10 or just Nevada? What type of problems are you seeing? Casper _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
