Linux 2.0.x has almost perfect source level kernel compatibility.
I've seen binary level compatibility. I've had to wait 18 months for sun
to ship a bug fix because it had binary compatibility issues. I had to
start posting exploits to bugtraq in the end. This wasnt just a 'get root'
level bug this was an 'any user can take out your local lan' bug.
> Currently, this model of changing kernel interfaces within supposedly
> stable releases DOESN'T WORK. It must change, or Linux will
> inevitably lose.
No the model of binary kernel modules doesn't work. Thats not my problem.
Binary only compatibility is the cause of many of the problems in windows
> I hope you can see the necessity of true stability.
Its not your fault you have a binary only problem. I take source compatibility
very seriously. During 2.0.36 and the like I drop random 2.0.3x drivers from
older trees into a .35 or .36 and check they still build and run. Thats extremel
important.
If I have to change a short to an int to fix a security hole (eg the mm based
exploits about .34 or so) I will. I refuse to let 7 million users suffer because
IBM have a problem with source code releases. I don't gratuitiously change
binary compatibility in 2.0.x trees. But if it needs doing it gets done.
Linux is solid because the Linux community puts quality and bug fixes ahead
of IBM corp.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/