From: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: arun4linux <arun4linux@indiatimes.com>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>,
netdev@oss.sgi.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: pci-skeleton duplex check
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:14:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021214161446.B23020@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200212141428.TAA32351@WS0005.indiatimes.com>; from arun4linux@indiatimes.com on Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 08:05:30PM +0530
On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 08:05:30PM +0530, arun4linux wrote:
> Interfaces should NEVER change in patch level versions.
> Just *DO NOT DO IT*.
> I do agree on this.
Rubbish.
Think about what you've just said. Patch level version changes are
things like 2.5.43 to 2.5.44 or 2.4.19 to 2.4.20.
You are saying that we shouldn't change any interfaces between (eg)
2.5.43 and 2.5.44, but we should change every interface we want to
change between 2.4.15 and 2.5.0.
This is obviously completely bogus. 2.5 is a _development_ tree.
Everyone should expect anything, including interfaces to change
between each development patch level.
> This is a common complaint about linux kernel developers. And this always
> gives an insecure feeling :-) for the device driver or kernel module
> programmers.
If interfaces are changed without extremely good reason between two
_stable_ patch level versions, that would be a bug.
> This was one of the issues in my earlier company/work and they have
> gone for another OS.
Was the problem against a stable kernel version? Did you report the
problem when you found it? Was there a response?
Unless you have done at least the above, I, for one, have very little
sympathy.
--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-14 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-12-14 14:35 Re: pci-skeleton duplex check arun4linux
2002-12-14 16:14 ` Russell King [this message]
2002-12-14 21:26 ` Mr. James W. Laferriere
2002-12-15 0:37 ` Steffen Persvold
2002-12-16 18:55 ` Aravind Ceyardass
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-17 14:35 Mark H. Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20021214161446.B23020@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=arun4linux@indiatimes.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox