Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z

From	cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups	comp.arch
Subject	Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z
Date	2026-04-12 20:17 +0000
Organization	PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID	<10rgul4$lao$1@reader1.panix.com> (permalink)
References	<20260404213401.0000593a@yahoo.com> <2d2gtkpm5ihtc9jkvfm6gq1dojco8fgtaf@4ax.com> <10rao08$jv9$1@reader1.panix.com> <10rdo84$e4s$1@gal.iecc.com>

Show all headers | View raw

In article <10rdo84$e4s$1@gal.iecc.com>, John Levine  <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>According to Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net>:
>>It occurs to me that another problem with the Linux way of doing
>>things (and really, this is true of any Unix-style system, and
>>probably Windows as well; perhaps any system generally) is that
>>dependencies can be compiled in different ways, and expose
>>different functionality as a result, with no change in version.
>
>This sounds like "don't do that" territory.  If you're going to
>provide a library, it needs to have a stable API.  If the
>API changes, change the version and document the change.  If
>it can be compiled in different ways that change the API (as
>opposed to, say, using different optimizations) those need to
>have different names.  I realize that too many people do not
>understand why this matters.

It may not even affect the external API.  Consider a library
that can, optionally, be compiled to take advantage of multiple
threads of execution internally.  Software that expects to use
that may have to take additional care to avoid conflicts between
threads (e.g., perhaps the library takes a reference to a
callback function that can be invoked by one of these threads;
now, the callback has to be carefully written to accommodate
the possibility of concurrent callback invocation, whereas in
the single-threaded version, it does not).  In this case, I
would argue that the API is the same, though I could see an
argument that it is not.

>>Systems that desire to have one copy of a library installed in
>>one place suffer from the obvious problem of needing to expose
>>the union of functionality expected of all programs that depend
>>on them, ....
>
>Sorry but what's "them" here?  The library, some group of
>libraries, every program that uses the library?

The set of libraries on the system, any one of which has only
one verison installed.

	- Dan C.

Thread

Arm to run within IBM z Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-04 21:34 +0300
  Re: Arm to run within IBM z quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-04-04 20:39 +0000
    Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-04 22:08 +0000
      Re: Arm to run within IBM z quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-04-04 23:32 +0000
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z David Schultz <david.schultz@earthlink.net> - 2026-04-04 20:12 -0500
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-04-05 00:14 -0400
            Re: Arm to run within IBM z David Schultz <david.schultz@earthlink.net> - 2026-04-05 06:12 -0500
              Re: Arm to run within IBM z George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-04-06 13:09 -0400
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-04-05 09:56 +0000
            Re: Arm to run within IBM z David Schultz <david.schultz@earthlink.net> - 2026-04-05 06:17 -0500
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-05 16:09 +0000
  Re: Arm to run within IBM z antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-05 02:35 +0000
    Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-05 02:56 +0000
      Re: Arm to run within IBM z Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-04-04 21:11 -0700
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-05 04:34 +0000
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-04-04 22:04 -0700
            Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-06 00:30 +0000
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-05 12:51 +0300
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-04-05 15:04 +0000
      Re: Arm to run within IBM z antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-05 16:16 +0000
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-06 00:31 +0000
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-04-06 03:57 +0000
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-06 07:04 +0000
            Re: Arm to run within IBM z MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-04-06 16:35 +0000
              Re: Arm to run within IBM z scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-04-06 16:48 +0000
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-04-06 22:32 +0000
              Re: Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-06 18:41 +0000
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-04-06 22:33 +0000
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 02:31 +0300
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-07 14:41 +0000
              Re: Arm to run within IBM z quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-04-07 02:16 +0000
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-07 04:55 +0000
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-04-07 05:44 +0000
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-07 07:53 +0000
                Re: Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-07 14:44 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-07 19:39 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-08 11:39 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-08 19:25 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z David Schultz <david.schultz@earthlink.net> - 2026-04-08 15:48 -0500
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-08 20:54 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-09 00:07 +0300
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-04-09 17:51 -0400
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-10 11:47 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-11 15:09 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-04-11 17:53 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-11 19:20 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-11 21:37 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-04-11 14:49 -0700
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-11 23:37 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-04-12 23:03 -0400
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-04-15 12:55 -0700
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-12 20:22 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-12 20:17 +0000
                Re: library confusion, Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-13 03:36 +0000
                Re: library confusion, Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-13 11:27 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-04-15 12:22 +0100
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-15 13:51 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-04-15 14:43 +0000
                Re: libraries, Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-16 01:24 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-16 00:49 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Paul Clayton <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2026-04-18 22:35 -0400
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-19 03:04 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-04-19 00:34 -0400
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-19 06:03 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Andy Valencia <vandys@vsta.org> - 2026-04-13 09:21 -0700
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-04-13 17:21 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2026-04-13 18:55 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-13 20:15 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-04-13 20:20 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2026-04-14 04:51 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-04-14 05:54 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2026-04-14 16:23 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-13 19:56 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-04-15 12:22 +0100
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-15 13:53 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-15 22:28 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-04-08 19:48 +0000
                Re: Windows, was Arm to run within IBM z Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-04-09 09:49 -0400
              Re: Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-07 19:35 +0000
    Re: Arm to run within IBM z Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-04-04 20:56 -0700
      Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-05 04:36 +0000
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-05 13:41 +0300
      Re: Arm to run within IBM z antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-05 17:04 +0000
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-04-06 04:04 +0000
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-06 12:29 +0300
    Re: Arm to run within IBM z quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-04-05 05:24 +0000
      Re: Arm to run within IBM z John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-04-05 19:14 +0000
  Re: Arm to run within IBM z jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-04-05 12:43 +0100
    Re: Arm to run within IBM z scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-04-05 15:12 +0000
      Re: Arm to run within IBM z cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-06 12:21 +0000
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-04-06 16:46 +0000
        Re: Arm to run within IBM z "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-04-09 02:27 -0700
          Re: Arm to run within IBM z scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-04-09 14:49 +0000
    Re: Arm to run within IBM z Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-06 00:35 +0000
  Re: Arm to run within IBM z "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-04-08 18:41 -0700

csiph-web