[Portland] Re: Project Portland,
RuDI and the Generic desktop adapter
daniel.r.kegel at gmail.com
Fri Dec 9 08:35:53 EET 2005
On 12/8/05, nf2 <nf2 at scheinwelt.at> wrote:
> As a Java developer i'm using Eclipse quite a lot and ldd reports that
> it dynamically links 32 libraries, including gtk+, glib etc. And it's a
> quite old Eclipse from March 2004. So where is the problem? This ABI
> debate is still a bit mystic to me...
I see ABI problems every day. For instance, Wine built on one
linux system often won't run on a different linux system.
By definition, this is an example of an ABI problem.
Not sure exactly which one, but whatever it is sure bites :-)
That said, I think there's room and need for both approaches.
#1, we need to make it easier for ISVs to develop
applications that directly link to binary libraries by
encouraging ABI stability and standardization (e.g. via the LSB).
And #2, we need to make it easier for ISVs to develop
applications that are less dependent on ABIs.
ISVs can then pick and choose which approach works best
for their app.
Why won't Johnny run Linux? See http://kegel.com/linux/comfort
More information about the Portland