Bryan Sant wrote: > Because Linus Torvalds does not believe (and strongly defends) that > binary compatibility is a hindrance not a help. I TOTALLY disagree. > I understand that not worrying about maintaining a backwards > compatible ABI can make life a little easier for kernel developers who > want to implement new features, but it's a nightmare for end uses who > just want their kernel modules to work. This is the main reason I > have any interest in Solaris/OpenSolaris. 10+ years and they've never > broken the ABI. Does anyone know if *BSD has a stable ABI?
*BSD does have a pretty stable driver ABI, yes. Linux is coming at it from a fundamentally different POV than solaris or BSD. Linux' goals are different. Linus' point is that drivers belong in kernel proper anyway, and should be properly maintained by someone familiar with the kernel. Having proprietary outside drivers coded to a stable ABI could introduce all kinds of security problems and stability problems to the kernel, none of which are the kernel's fault. In short Linus believes (and I agree with him) that drivers should be in the kernel source tree and always properly maintained, or not be there at all. Michael > > -Bryan > > /* > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > Don't fear the penguin. > */ > /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
