Re: containers/chroot to allow ABI breakage is the wrong approach

2014-10-24 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 10/21/2014 05:12 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Thomas Goirand wrote: So, dear fellow DDs, I'm asking you: each time you see that an upstream author is breaking an ABI on a package you maintain, write an email to him/her, and explain how much this is bad and shouldn't

Re: containers/chroot to allow ABI breakage is the wrong approach

2014-10-23 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Gregory Smith dixit: They say you're a hard nose, skeptical, untrusting, old unix admin and programmer from the old days and you do not take one ounce of My old days were on DOS¹. I am a relative newcomer to the Unix world, starting about 1999. But I grew up with the “old values”, including

Re: containers/chroot to allow ABI breakage is the wrong approach (was: Remember when men were men and wrote their own init scripts? =))

2014-10-21 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 10/21/2014 01:34 AM, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote: I mean, when I read that infamous guy, Poettering, talking about things like this: http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html Actually, while the rest of your post isn't helpful (or even an annoyance), I'm happy

Re: containers/chroot to allow ABI breakage is the wrong approach (was: Remember when men were men and wrote their own init scripts? =))

2014-10-21 Thread Thorsten Glaser
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Thomas Goirand wrote: So, dear fellow DDs, I'm asking you: each time you see that an upstream author is breaking an ABI on a package you maintain, write an email to him/her, and explain how much this is bad and shouldn't happen. If the Unix community starts to realize how

Re: containers/chroot to allow ABI breakage is the wrong approach (was: Remember when men were men and wrote their own init scripts? =))

2014-10-21 Thread Konstantin Khomoutov
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:12:20 +0200 Thorsten Glaser t...@mirbsd.de wrote: So, dear fellow DDs, I'm asking you: each time you see that an upstream author is breaking an ABI on a package you maintain, write an email to him/her, and explain how much this is bad and shouldn't happen. If the

Re: containers/chroot to allow ABI breakage is the wrong approach

2014-10-21 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Konstantin Khomoutov dixit: Sometimes we have to run software which is neither Open Source nor Free on our systems which are (luckily) Open Source and Free. Things like f-prot are shipped statically linked, when in their binary form for OpenBSD. And binary compatibility only goes so far either

Re: containers/chroot to allow ABI breakage is the wrong approach (was: Remember when men were men and wrote their own init scripts? =))

2014-10-21 Thread Matthias Urlichs
Hi, Thorsten Glaser: OpenBSD’s libc.so major number is 50 or something like that right now, because they – correctly – increment it on every incompatible change. Glibc has versioned symbols instead … This is not a problem because, you know, we have Open Source, so we can always just