HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat headed for history

Scott Long scottl at samsco.org
Sat Jun 26 11:12:53 PDT 2004

Alex Keahan wrote:
> 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.

Please please please remove the tinfoil hat.  This is _ABSOLUTELY_ not
the case.


More information about the freebsd-current mailing list