English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
Why don't you use batteries?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2009-09-05 (12:02)
From: Richard Jones <rich@a...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why don't you use batteries?
On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 01:03:28PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
> Linux is basically a complete disaster in this regard because it
> offers so little binary compatibility between distros.

You probably want to use a commercial Linux distribution.  Red Hat (as
an example) *guarantee* perfect binary compatibility for the 7 - 10
year lifespan of a release of RHEL.

By guarantee I mean any binary incompatibility is treated as a
regression and fixed as a very high priority (just below security
issues).  We internally run source level tools to try to avoid
releasing incompatible ABIs in the first place.

> Building upon a decent VM solves this problem and many others, of
> course, but Linux has none.

Not sure what you mean by this.  Linux was the first _PC_[1] OS to
incorporate a hypervisor into the kernel (Xen or KVM depending on your
interpretation of the words "hypervisor" and/or "incorporate").

With RHEL 6 we'll also be making the same ABI guarantees as above for
KVM virtual machines.


[1] VM/CMS and the rest was on mainframes, m'kay?

Richard Jones
Red Hat