[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: backward compatability of tools
From: |
Dr. David Kirkby |
Subject: |
Re: backward compatability of tools |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Feb 2003 23:17:04 +0000 (GMT) |
David Kirkby Ph.D,
email: address@hidden
former email address: address@hidden
web page: http://www.david-kirkby.co.uk
Amateur radio callsign: G8WRB
On 21 Feb 2003, Paul Eggert wrote:
> "Dr. David Kirkby" <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > If the developers insist on dropping backward compatibility, would it
> > not be better to at least do a test for old hardware/software
>
> I wouldn't bother myself, because such a test would be a maintenance
> hassle. We don't have the resources to keep track of all the quirks
> of ancient hardware. We have enough trouble keeping track of the
> oddities of live systems.
>
> At some point, when a system is no longer active, it is better for all
> concerned if we simply drop support for it. The reality is that GNU
> developers have limited resources, and efforts expended on inactive
> systems draw needed resources away from more important areas.
>
> > Should well written software not respond with informative messages, no
> > matter how invalid the user input?
>
> This is not a question of invalid user input. This is a question of
> bugs in the operating system. Autoconf-generated scripts, no matter
> how well-written, cannot survive arbitrary OS bugs.
Okay my apology, 'user input' was not the correct term. However, if I
tried to install a piece of software that only run on Windoze 2000 and XP,
on a Windoze 95 machine, I would expect the software to have the sense to
tell me that it is not supported on Windoze 95. Perhaps that is a better
analogy.
- Re: backward compatability of tools, (continued)
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Eric Siegerman, 2003/02/19
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Paul Eggert, 2003/02/19
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Eric Siegerman, 2003/02/19
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Bruce Korb, 2003/02/19
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Roger Leigh, 2003/02/20
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Dr. David Kirkby, 2003/02/21
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Paul Eggert, 2003/02/21
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Thomas E. Dickey, 2003/02/21
- Re: backward compatability of tools,
Dr. David Kirkby <=
- Re: backward compatability of tools, John Burger, 2003/02/21
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Thomas E. Dickey, 2003/02/22
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Paul Eggert, 2003/02/23
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Thomas E. Dickey, 2003/02/23
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Paul Eggert, 2003/02/23
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Dr. David Kirkby, 2003/02/23
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Paul Eggert, 2003/02/23
- Re: backward compatability of tools, Dr. David Kirkby, 2003/02/24