This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [libc-alpha] Re: [open-source] Re: Wish for 2002
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds at transmeta dot com>
- To: Mark Brown <bmark at us dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" <tb at becket dot net>, Kaz Kylheku <kaz at ashi dot footprints dot net>, Roland McGrath <roland at frob dot com>, Russ Allbery <rra at stanford dot edu>, <libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:42:06 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: [libc-alpha] Re: [open-source] Re: Wish for 2002
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Thursday, January 10, 2002, at 11:29 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > While _I_ think it's an argument for trying to make glibc go on a diet.
>
> Keeping in mind that whatever we add, we will have hell trying to
> remove. Binary compatibility is going to be the keyword here...
Yes.
>From a development standpoint it might just be a good idea to start over
with a new major number, and start from basically zero (ie start from some
"POSIX+SuS-required" set rather than the existing one).
Exactly because it is easier to add later than to remove. And it's good to
leave the old behind every once in a while (and get rid of the cruft that
accumulated for binary compatibility)
But as with all cleanup, very few developers actually _want_ to do this.
It's work, and it doesn't get you that warm fuzzy feeling of doing
something new and exciting.
Linus