On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:01:35 +0200, Erik Trulsson

> If you actually believe that I have a very nice bridge here you might
> be interested in.  It is certainly the goal that things which worked on
> 4.x will continue to work in 5.x, and it might even work out that way
> in 99.99% of all cases, but *everything*? Not a bloody chance - there
> are always bugs that have yet to fixed (or even discovered).

The primary phrase which a developer must believe is "No software is
100% foolproof". So speaking in that line, indeed no software
including the Releases of FreeBSD are 100% bug free. What I meant was,
the RELEASE, not STABLE is expected to work correctly and fight back
all the bugs that had been discovered till date. But I never meant it
is perfect. If it was, then we would never have patches or future
releases. And BTW I would be really interested to know about some
hardware/software which used to work under 4.X and stopped working
under 5.Y even after updating to the latest versions and applying all
patches/hacks. It is entirely probable and acceptable that out of the
box, a software natively made for 4.X will not work on 5.Y

> Depends. It it is a 486sx it will not run 5.x  (support for FPU-less
> systems has been removed.) I believe 5.x also needs a bit more memory
> than 4.x, so if that box has too little RAM it might be unbearably slow
> under 5.x

Yeh, I forgot to mention about the FPU. Thanks for adding up.

> And that is bullshit. It is of course possible to compile a 4.x binary
> on a 5.x box - just make sure you link against the right libraries (and
> in the case of C++ programs at least, compile with a compatible
> compiler.)  I don't know if it is possible to do this without jumping
> through an inordinate number of hoops however.

First of all, I guess u got a bit too aggresive which I believe is
unnecessary. Secondly, Try disassembling a 4.X binary and a 5.X
binary, you will understand what I mean. I have done it myself and I
am sure about it. Things start differing even more when you start
enabling things like unrolling loops and making things architecture
dependant with mcpu, march and similar flags. And btw I guess you
missed a word in my previous mail. I added the word "native". Do
clarify if that was not clear to you what I meant by Native.


Subhro Sankha Kar
School of Information Technology
Block AQ-13/1 Sector V
ZIP 700091
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to