On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 08:45:11AM -0700, Henry B. Hotz wrote: > API and source distribution compatibility does not necessarily imply > ABI compatibility. I don't see a strong need for ABI compatibility.
So every time MIT makes a new release you rebuild all other krb5/gss applications that you run? Seriously?? For Sun ABI compatibility is considered far more important than source compatibility, and it's what we guarantee (modulo EOF announcements and our interface stability and release type taxonomies). From previous conversations with Sam (and I am aware that he left the Consortium) MIT cares about the ABI as much as we do. (I should take this as an opportunity to knock operating systems where having to rebuild applications from source with every OS release is par for the course...) Nico --
