Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!taronga!peter
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: AT&T Long Distance Boycott (was: BNR2SS, Mach, and The Lawsuit)
Message-ID: <2R1JJPG@taronga.com>
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
References: <1992Sep4.234429.18294@newsgate.sps.mot.com> <QG0JYC1@taronga.com> <1992Sep06.065525.8475@kithrup.COM>
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 06:49:22 GMT
Lines: 24
In article <1992Sep06.065525.8475@kithrup.COM> sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes:
>In article <QG0JYC1@taronga.com> peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>You're assuming that "posix compliant" means anything actually useful.
>>From what I've seen it's seriously incomplete for any real applications,
>>and so amounts to no more than a checkmark on a requirements sheet.
>I don't know about that. gcc, gas, GNU make, the GNU binutils (and,
>perforce, the GNU BFD library) can all be built in a POSIX-only environment.
That makes perfect sense, since they're hackerware. All they do is file
translation, and the only OS services they need are reading and writing
files. Of course the code generator for GCC is system specific, and gas
needs to know the instruction set and details of the executable format.
>Those are real applications, after all.
They're tools, not applications. Applications are the things people buy
the computers for. Apart from developers, people rarely buy computers
for compilers. And developers need support for the code they're developing.
--
`-_-'
Have you hugged your wolf today? 'U`
Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX +1 713 568 0480/1032