HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat headed for history
alex at hightemplar.com
Sat Jun 26 11:07:05 PDT 2004
On Saturday 26 Jun 2004 8:24 pm, Tim Robbins wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 07:50:38PM +0300, Alex Keahan wrote:
> > On Saturday 26 Jun 2004 7:17 pm, Tim Robbins wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 05:43:20PM +0200, Cordula's Web wrote:
> > > > > > > - Numerous third-party applications for SCO and Solaris/x86
> > > > > > > (e.g. backup solutions)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maple V for Solaris/x86.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is something wrong with Maple for Linux? (Which is up to version
> > > > > 9.5, looks as if.)
> > > >
> > > > No license. Gatuitously dropping backward compatibility support for
> > > > commercial software is rude, to say the least... Where was that old
> > > > Solaris/x86 HDD now?. Yuck. :-(
> > >
> > > No, it's realistic. Maintaining SVR4/i386 compatibility is not a good
> > > use of developer resources considering how few people use it.
> > What happened to "if it ain't broken, don't axe it"?
> The kernel's internal interfaces change; security bugs are discovered.
> Someone has to keep the code up to date, and the people who end up doing
> the work are *not* the people who advocate keeping the code around.
That's a slippery slope and you don't want to go there.
Maintenance of old code is the price you have to pay when you write new code.
That includes kernel interfaces and security bugs.
I just hope the removal of IBCS2 is not a political decision to get back at
SCO for their predatory legal tactics.
More information about the freebsd-current