>>>>> "kenj" == Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
So, you ARE in town after all.
kenj> On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 17:04 +1000, Max Matveev wrote:
>> - 947781 - add functions to implement asynchornous communication
>> with pmcd and functions to implement application main loop
kenj> Was there any discussion on the list about this?
kenj> - rationale?
We wanted it.
kenj> - compatibility issues?
It's compatible with the current pcp apps.
kenj> - no apparent changes to pmproxy ... was the asynchronous stuff ever
kenj> tested with pmproxy ... on the face of it I don't see how it could
kenj> possibly work which leaves at least one person stuck ... 8^(>
pmproxy works with old application, there was no perceived need to
support pmproxy and async mode at the same time.
kenj> - why is libpcp.so.2 a symlink to libpcp.so.3 when the ABI has changed
kenj> so radically?
Because the ABI changed so radically the new version was made. This is
the "linux way" of dealing with compatibility: add new entry points -
bump the version number.
kenj> For those of us not using IRIX, how is backwards compatibility
kenj> supposed to be maintained, e.g. newly linked apps cannot run on
kenj> old pcp installations
That's forward compatibility, not backward - the backward
compatibility is old apps on new pcp and it works just fine here. The
forward compatibility is unachievable on Linux: I could've kept the
same version number and then apps which use async mode would break
because the symbols are missing from the library. On Irix, btw, it's
still libpcp.so.2 and optional symbols.
kenj> Other than that
kenj> a. it complies and installs fine on Fedora Core 4 (I'll try Windows
kenj> tomorrow)
There is no changes in windows pmda - I've sent you a mail last week
about it.
kenj> b. I have a bunch of other patches that I'll have to redo against
kenj> 2.5.99 ... can you hold off until I can do that, or do you just want to
kenj> wait and get a dumping of day-1 patches for 2.6 when it releases?
I can hold - there is no rush, I just wanted to push the current state
out, knowing you'd have something to say. And you can still send
patches against 2.5.0 if you want, I can reconcile them.
max
|