libc changes and freebsd-4 compatible binaries

Martin P. Hellwig mhellwig at
Tue May 3 09:23:20 PDT 2005

talon at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Martin P. Hellwig <mhellwig at xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

1.2 release. Although I find it frustrating too (the libmap bull was the 
primary reason for me to leave Free) I reckon sometimes harsh measures 
are needed. It is mostly better to brake with compatibility then to 
suffer from old rubbish (Windows ME anyone?)

I disagree with that. THE main strength of Windows is that you can run the
same binaries on Win98 all the way to WinXP. 

That really depends on your software, at my shop (checked the 
maintenance log, don't know these figure out of my head) we had to ditch 
41 programs when upgrading from 98 to 2000, then from 2000 to XP another 
23 and from XP to XP SP2 12.
That is from a pool of 376 dos application, we have another fleet of NT 
programs, which broke from NT4 to XP SP2, but all of them where upgraded 
for no cost by their software maker.
Ditching in our case means that the maintainer for the software is out 
of biz and we didn't have any replacement software (where in the 
educational environment).
Some software works on 98 as on XP but enough of them don't.

I also have to keep some NT4 servers going because the organization 
depends on some old software, luckily enough for me virtual servers 
gives me a workaround for the old hardware problem.

However I am pleased with windows 2003 and especially with sp1, so the 
pain of upgrade is relative.

To conclude; I can not agree that the tatement that you can run the same 
binaries on 98 as on XP is always true, in my case it is too much not 
true to be relevant.


More information about the Kernel mailing list