Hello Stefan, Thursday, July 27, 2006, 9:42:45 PM, you wrote:
ST> [ offlist ] ST> On 7/27/06, Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Mmmm. Perhaps I was overly assertive, although I stick to the principle. >> 'Course, the ensuing discussion about ksh88 not being able to be open >> sourced doesn't help the debate. ST> you weren't being "overly assertive". ST> this backwards compatibility for backwards compatibility's sake is no ST> longer a selling point. Linux has proven that backwards compatibility ST> for its own sake is largely irrelevant (my personal unhappiness about ST> this incompatibility, grounded in purely philosophical rather than ST> practical considerations notwithstanding). We do lot of app development on Linux and Solaris. And due to lack of backward compatibility in case of Linux it takes us much more time to upgrade Linux distros and get our applications running while on Solaris upgrading or running every possible nevada with the same binaries just work. With Solaris generally we produce only one binary package for a given application and then use with older Solaris releases. With Linux we have to provide different binary package for every distro release version we use. And it takes more and more time spent on upgrading Linux distros. In that area Solaris saves a lot of time comparing to Linux. -- Best regards, Robert mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
