3 ms·

Like I said, it's technically possible and that is (outside a very small number of well-defined outliers like OpenGL) entirely irrelevant in terms of whether it

by mjg59 5y ago

Like I said, it's technically possible and that is (outside a very small number of well-defined outliers like OpenGL) entirely irrelevant in terms of whether it's practically possible. Even if we rewrote every library now to have mechanisms to make this easier, it wouldn't help for any of the older versions that don't do this and which are already deployed everywhere.

badsectoracula 5y ago
Of course it is practically possible, as long as the developers care about backwards ABI compatibility - the issue isn't if it is possible or not (it certainly is as actual existing APIs and libraries show), the issue is library developers breaking their libraries' ABIs. But that doesn't mean it isn't possible to do something like this, it means that you have to stick to libraries that do not break their ABIs. And this has absolutely nothing to do with Linux you brought previously, everything i mentioned works on Linux and any other OS that supports dynamic linking and has ABI backwards compatibility for the applications that run on top of it.
- mjg59 5y ago
  RHEL 8 doesn't ship with GTK 4. How do I ship an application that uses functionality that only exists in GTK 4 if available, but falls back to GTK 3 if it isn't? If libraries had been written with this in mind (like OpenGL was), then yes, there'd be a path to doing so. Libraries on Linux could work in the way you suggest. But, for the most part, they don't.
  - badsectoracula 5y ago
    Well yes, you basically come to what i've been writing about so far: the issue is with libraries like GTK 4 that break ABI backwards compatibility. It isn't the issue with Linux, Linux doesn't break ABI backwards compatibility - if GTK 4 didn't break their ABI you could use the GTK 3 API as a baseline for your application and dynamically load the new GTK 4 stuff (and as a bonus you'd get any inherent improvements that might be there in GTK 4 that are exposed through the GTK 3 API, like how -e.g.- applications written for WinXP get the emoji input popup on Win 10 even though that didn't exist during WinXP's time). The REAL problem is libraries breaking their ABIs, not Linux itself.
    - mjg59 5y ago
      If you're defining Linux as a kernel, then yes, the kernel does not impose any constraints on userland that would make this impossible - and I never said it did. If you're defining Linux as a complete OS, then the fact that it's conceptually possible for libraries to behave this way is irrelevant; they could, but they don't, and any solution for distributing apps needs to deal with that reality rather than just asserting that everything else should be rewritten first before anyone can do anything.

by mjg59 5y ago

badsectoracula 5y ago

Of course it is practically possible, as long as the developers care about backwards ABI compatibility - the issue isn't if it is possible or not (it certainly is as actual existing APIs and libraries show), the issue is library developers breaking their libraries' ABIs. But that doesn't mean it isn't possible to do something like this, it means that you have to stick to libraries that do not break their ABIs. And this has absolutely nothing to do with Linux you brought previously, everything i mentioned works on Linux and any other OS that supports dynamic linking and has ABI backwards compatibility for the applications that run on top of it.

mjg59 5y ago
RHEL 8 doesn't ship with GTK 4. How do I ship an application that uses functionality that only exists in GTK 4 if available, but falls back to GTK 3 if it isn't? If libraries had been written with this in mind (like OpenGL was), then yes, there'd be a path to doing so. Libraries on Linux could work in the way you suggest. But, for the most part, they don't.
- badsectoracula 5y ago
  Well yes, you basically come to what i've been writing about so far: the issue is with libraries like GTK 4 that break ABI backwards compatibility. It isn't the issue with Linux, Linux doesn't break ABI backwards compatibility - if GTK 4 didn't break their ABI you could use the GTK 3 API as a baseline for your application and dynamically load the new GTK 4 stuff (and as a bonus you'd get any inherent improvements that might be there in GTK 4 that are exposed through the GTK 3 API, like how -e.g.- applications written for WinXP get the emoji input popup on Win 10 even though that didn't exist during WinXP's time). The REAL problem is libraries breaking their ABIs, not Linux itself.
  - mjg59 5y ago
    If you're defining Linux as a kernel, then yes, the kernel does not impose any constraints on userland that would make this impossible - and I never said it did. If you're defining Linux as a complete OS, then the fact that it's conceptually possible for libraries to behave this way is irrelevant; they could, but they don't, and any solution for distributing apps needs to deal with that reality rather than just asserting that everything else should be rewritten first before anyone can do anything.