[openbeos] Re: Why OpenBeOS Applications?
- From: David Sowsy <dsowsy@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 15:56:54 -0500 (EST)
Eh, if you check the archives this was all decided and
debated over months ago.
On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Daniel Reinhold wrote:
> What do you mean "provide it with R1"??? R2 is the successor to R1.
>
> I see no way that successive releases will remain forever backwards
> compatible with BeOS R5. At some point, we'll have to break BC to add
> new functionality. Allowing gcc3.x in the tool chain alone would break
> BC. It will happen sooner or later -- my guess is sooner. I think that
> after R1 is released, it will become the case of "hey developers,
> recompile your source for R2 or your app is out of the picture". Be did
> this with R4. My guess is that we'll do this for R2. After that, tho,
> we should never have to break BC again.
>
>
> >
> >> However, only R1 is concerned with BC. OBOS R2 is guaranteed NOT to
> >> be
> >> BC compatible, let alone R3, R4...
> >
> >That's not really correct - AFAI understand it, R2 will also be binary
> >compatible with the current BeOS - if it's not, it doesn't make *any*
> >sense to provide it with R1 (since we already have R5).
> >It will just have newer libraries, or even other libraries that may
> not
> >be compatible.
> >Old binaries should also run on R2 and up.
> >
> >Adios...
> > Axel.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Other related posts:
