Re: Maintenance policies and early considerations IV


Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...>
 

On Fri, 2016-10-07 at 07:34 +0000, 小口琢夫 / KOGUCHI,TAKUO wrote:
Hi Agustin,
Let me understand what you wrote.
CIP should avoid making any such promise because:

* Upstream fixes frequently change the kernel module API and/or ABI and
backporting them in a way that does not is difficult and risky - CIP
users set their own kernel configurations, so there will not be a
single kernel ABI for IHVs to target anyway
Correction:

Upstream fixes frequently change the kernel module API and/or ABI and
backporting them in a way that is difficult and risky - CIP users set
their own kernel configurations, so there will not be a single kernel ABI for IHVs to
target anyway
Is the correction correct?
The first version is what I wrote, and the correction says something I
did not mean to say.

I thought you wrote;
* Upstream fixes frequently change the kernel module API and/or ABI and
backporting them in a way that does not (change the kernel module API and/or ABI )is difficult and risky - CIP
Am I wrong?
No, you understand me rightly.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Software Developer, Codethink Ltd.

Join cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org to automatically receive all group messages.