Subject: Re: Versions and uname output
To: Todd Vierling <email@example.com>
From: Frederick Bruckman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/10/2003 12:43:39
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> : That's what I meant to say. ;-) There might^Wwill be places where it
> : actually matters, so it would be really bad to lose the information.
> I believe it should be stripped, because the 1.6 branch does not have kernel
> version increments (the way that 1.6A ... 1.6Q do). _STABLE represents a
> possibly changing codebase and is *not* useful as a reference point.
In that sense, "uname()" and "uname(1)" are not useful at all, since
they represent the kernel that happens to be installed, and not the
version of libc or the system headers that the binary was compiled to.
For the sorts of things that matter to a package (in this case, the
curses API), you have to pick the nearest, and hope for the best.
That's not even the worst of it. Experience shows that ABI changes
with any sort of justification to them -- strlcpy() and friends,
openssl, rpc changes -- are promptly pulled up to the branch, and
cries that this makes things difficult for pkgsrc hasn't stopped any