3 ms·
It's more they are aware that there is still no stable abi and they know of breaking changes coming down the pipeline internally already.
by mattnewton 10y ago
It's more they are aware that there is still no stable abi and they know of breaking changes coming down the pipeline internally already.
- bluejekyll 10y agoPeople always demand a stable ABI, but I've seen very few use case on enterprise software delivered to the cloud where this is even necessary. Most people rebuild their software entirely prior to release, and deliver the entire package. Having a stable ABI doesn't do much to help this scenario. Linux doesn't have a stable ABI, hasn't hurt its success much.
- cyphar 10y ago> Linux doesn't have a stable ABI, hasn't hurt its success much. Linux does have a stable ABI. And GNU'e libc tries to have one but it breaks often enough to be a concern (even with symbol versioning). You're conflating GNU and Linux here.
- bluejekyll 10y agoYou are right. I should have explicitly called out glibc. I've not had to work about direct Linux ABI interactions.