httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <>
Subject RE: am I dreaming?
Date Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:17:44 GMT
On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Randy Terbush wrote:

> It is also important that the binary module vendors who are screaming
> about this problem offer a solution back to this project instead of
> making demands that it be changed.

Yup -- but not only must they offer an initial solution, they must also
maintain it.  Otherwise it'll only last for one rev of the magic number,
defeating its usefulness.  As an open source developer, I don't personally
want to expend any effort catering to the binary-only crowd. 

In order to assess the possibility of such an interface, someone needs to
do extensive research of all the previous magic number changes (focus on
the ones for minor releases, we don't put much thought into changes during
betas).  Until someone has done this we're all just blowing hot air.

BTW, I'd like to suggest that people should be very concerned about tying
themselves to a binary module for apache... because even with such an
interface there's no guarantee that it will work across an upgrade.  And
you won't have source, so how will you fix the bugs?  You know, the
standard arguments for having source.  As soon as you introduce one binary
module into the mix you're tying your hands behind your back.

For another similar example read the linux-kernel archives around the time
2.2.0 was released, there was a nice huge thread on pretty much the same
topic:  binary-only linux kernel modules.  Linus strives for source
compatibility, cares not about binary compatibility, but never holds back
the progress of the kernel just to keep the binary folks happy. 


View raw message