Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Who is we? And why should I care who selected that number. It's not about who selected the number, it's about who's responsible for distributing binaries which use the currently used number. > There is no > glibc release yet and no stable kernel release yet with that number. Of course there is. You better don't talk about thinks you don't know. > Interfaces change during 2.5 (see the sys_security and largepage syscall > removal) and that's okay. There was no nastiness involved in my > suggestion. You don't get it. I would never have distributed binaries with the current code if it wouldn't have been requested along with the guarantee that the current interface is stable and final. -- --------------. ,-. 444 Castro Street Ulrich Drepper \ ,-----------------' \ Mountain View, CA 94041 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `--------------------------- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Follow-Ups:
- Re: make AT_SYSINFO platform-independentChristoph Hellwig
- Re: make AT_SYSINFO platform-independentUlrich Drepper
- Re: make AT_SYSINFO platform-independentChristoph Hellwig
- Prev by Date: Re: make AT_SYSINFO platform-independent
- Next by Date: 2.5.56 lib/kobject.c "badness" (ppp bug?)
- Previous by thread: Re: make AT_SYSINFO platform-independent
- Next by thread: Re: make AT_SYSINFO platform-independent
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]