From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f499WY218675 for linux-mips-outgoing; Wed, 9 May 2001 02:32:34 -0700 Received: from noose.gt.owl.de (postfix@noose.gt.owl.de [62.52.19.4]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f499WSF18671; Wed, 9 May 2001 02:32:28 -0700 Received: by noose.gt.owl.de (Postfix, from userid 10) id 7515A7D9; Wed, 9 May 2001 11:32:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by paradigm.rfc822.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EF422F38D; Wed, 9 May 2001 10:46:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 10:46:35 +0200 From: Florian Lohoff To: Tom Appermont Cc: Ralf Baechle , linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Binary compatibility break understood ? Message-ID: <20010509104635.D12267@paradigm.rfc822.org> References: <20010505144708.A12575@paradigm.rfc822.org> <20010507163210.B2381@bacchus.dhis.org> <20010508202518.A13476@paradigm.rfc822.org> <20010508214313.A12528@bacchus.dhis.org> <20010509095955.A8392@sonycom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <20010509095955.A8392@sonycom.com>; from tea@sonycom.com on Wed, May 09, 2001 at 09:59:55AM +0200 Organization: rfc822 - pure communication Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 09:59:55AM +0200, Tom Appermont wrote: > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:43:13PM -0300, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 08:25:18PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > > > > > > compatibility. I read the whole thread on linux-mips but i didnt get the point > > > > > why this has to happen - If we are repairing a real bug for it. > > > > > > > > > > Could someone please elaborate on whats going on as i feel i missed ~200 mails > > > > > discussion and i dont want to purge the whole debian archive until i know > > > > > what for we actually drop the compatibility. > > > > > > > > We don't. > > > > > > Could you explain a bit more - I'd like to understand the whole issue. > > > > The whole point was to switch from our IRIX ELF flavoured binaries to > > standard ABI ELF. These two variants are close but not identical which > > for example made modutils missbehave. > > What is the current status on this? The patches for the tools are already > integrated in their cvs trees (right?). But I don't think everybody was > happy with this in the end, aspecially the people wearing debian hats. > Is anybody working on a solution, or are we waiting for the debian people > to rebuild all the packages? As the binary compatibility is not going to break we dont need to rebuild. I wasnt really happy with the answer of ralf as it brought me nothing nearer in the understanding of the whole issue. But asking 3 times to get a fully explanation on where the problem is, what breaks, and how to fix is enough. I'll lean back, continue building .debs and wait for others to fix it. Flo -- Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-5201-669912 Why is it called "common sense" when nobody seems to have any?