FreeBSD Hackers,
I have a general question about the compatibility of FreeBSD binaries
within major releases. If I build a binary for a given release of
FreeBSD can I make a reasonable guarantee that the binary will run on
both previous and subsequent minor releases of the same major release?
In
Carl Shapiro wrote:
FreeBSD Hackers,
I have a general question about the compatibility of FreeBSD binaries
within major releases. If I build a binary for a given release of
FreeBSD can I make a reasonable guarantee that the binary will run on
both previous and subsequent minor releases of the
On Mon, 5 May 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Carl Shapiro wrote:
FreeBSD Hackers,
I have a general question about the compatibility of FreeBSD binaries
within major releases. If I build a binary for a given release of
FreeBSD can I make a reasonable guarantee that the binary will run on
both
Daniel Eischen wrote:
Binaries compiled on a certain version of FreeBSD will continue to run
on later versions, but are not guaranteed to run on earlier versions
(and in fact *will* not run depending on the binary). This is because
over time the system libraries and kernel grow new features
Hi All,
I've been trying to use gprof on some C++ code and appears it doesn't
demangle C++ function names. I was wondering if anyone is working on
it? I would like to contribute/help in adding this.
Purushotham
_
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Carl Shapiro wrote:
FreeBSD Hackers,
I have a general question about the compatibility of FreeBSD binaries
within major releases. If I build a binary for a given release of
FreeBSD can I make a reasonable guarantee that the binary will run on
both previous and subsequent
Julian Elischer wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Carl Shapiro wrote:
FreeBSD Hackers,
I have a general question about the compatibility of FreeBSD binaries
within major releases. If I build a binary for a given release of
FreeBSD can I make a reasonable guarantee that the binary will run on
both
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Carl Shapiro wrote:
FreeBSD Hackers,
I have a general question about the compatibility of FreeBSD binaries
within major releases. If I build a binary for a given release of
FreeBSD can I make a reasonable guarantee that the
Kris Julian
Thank you for clarifiying the compatibility situation. This
information was exactly what I was looking for.
I have a follow-up question based on this remark...
On 5/5/08, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually we don't attempt to keep this form of ABI compatibility
Carl Shapiro wrote:
If my binary only executes system calls indirectly through libc
interfaces, as far as libc and libm are concerned, are new symbols the
only thing I need to worry about?
I think so, yes.
Kris
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Carl Shapiro wrote:
Kris Julian
Thank you for clarifiying the compatibility situation. This
information was exactly what I was looking for.
I have a follow-up question based on this remark...
On 5/5/08, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually we don't attempt to keep this form
Carl Shapiro wrote:
Kris Julian
Thank you for clarifiying the compatibility situation. This
information was exactly what I was looking for.
I have a follow-up question based on this remark...
On 5/5/08, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually we don't attempt to keep this form of
hi
when we want to use a hash table in kernel we call hashinit which
initializes a hash table with power-of-2 size. There's also phashinit
that creates hash table of size that is a prime number. This was
added in 1995 by davidg@ but it is not used anywhere in the kernel.
phk@ commited rev. 1.30
FreeBSD Hackers,
I have a general question about the compatibility of FreeBSD binaries
within major releases. If I build a binary for a given release of
FreeBSD can I make a reasonable guarantee that the binary will run on
As a datapoint, I have been using cistron-radiusd for
14 matches
Mail list logo
