New kernels and old distributions [LWN.net]

New kernels and old distributions

Posted Aug 6, 2006 20:05 UTC (Sun) by mattmelton (guest, #34842)
Parent article: New kernels and old distributions

From a programming point of view, when you link to 3rd party libraries of different versions but one SDK (Microsoft's DirectX for example), you call on a version specific init function.

Embedded Perl, for example, requires you to call perl_alloc(), before you do a printf, because the printf is cobbled to a perl-happy one.

Nothing stops me for doing, init_libraryv1.2() or init_libraryv2.3b(), when initiating different library versions that are tightly coupled.

From a userspace point of view, of course, there are no simple #define hacks to switch subsystem versions. Userspace does and should not care about versions... but here is the crux of the issue. It should.

sysfs is a tightly coupled subsystem, and tightly couple systems must be either maintained together, or comprehensively split. Why sysfs does not have some kind of versioning system already is something of a worry - maybe the whole focus on exciting exports to userspace blurred the coupling line a little.

I'd like, but I know I'll not get, a nice number interface - /sysfs/1.2/blah maybe? A link can provide a current issue, /sysfs/current/blah etc

Developers are too fixed, almost obessive, on code functionality than they are on legacy. LEGACY IS GOOD. Legacy code is meant to be left to rot. Legacy code does not need to be maintained - the entire point of code being demoted to a legacy level is that it should not be maintained. Unmaintained code is not a problem if it is superceeded.

(legacy code does need some kind of eviction management however, but that, is another topic)

I don't care if there's an incompatability in 10 versions of a subsystem for a new product. A new product should be made for the older subsystems, not for a bleeding edge one. People who write for and use bleeding edge software tend to really miss that point.

(security fixes aside... of course)

I know my point is very short sighted, and I could easily side the other way, if I did not write this. But the truth of the matter is that there is no easy way with something that evolves this fast.

Matt

(Log in to post comments)