Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (WAS Re: [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem

[Alan Cox]

On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 16:57, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2002 [e-mail] wrote:
> > 
> > I think we should stick to incrementing the major number when binary
> > compatibility is broken.
> 
> "Stick to"? We've never had that as any criteria for major numbers in the
> kernel. Binary compatibility has _never_ been broken as a release policy,
> only as a "that code is old, and we've given people 5 years to migrate to
> the new system calls, the old ones are TOAST".

We've generally done better than that. Libc 2.2.2 stil works