Re: ssh success
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 07:36:43AM -0400, Igor Khavkine wrote:
> Shouldn't concerns about portability be in the minds of upstream maintainers?
Yes, but we should lead with good example. I always try to mimic the
upstream source in functionality and style as close as I am able.
This also increases the chance that the support will be added timely.
> What we can do is fix the problem for Hurd first in a manner which is as close
> to The Right Thing as possible and submit the patches to upstream maintainers.
Yes, but use of __GNU__ for glibc/posix items is almost never close the The
Right Thing :) What you are fixing with this is not a Hurd issue, but a
POSIX incompatibility issue, which is triggered by the Hurds implementation
of POSIX.
> There are just too many possible
> systems out there to support by the few people who port packages to Hurd.
I am not talking about supporting all systems possible. In some cases,
conditionalizing on __GNU__ is justified, but the order of preference is
something like "adding a configure check", "using standardized interfaces"
(as pathconf) and then a long time nothing, and then "conditionalizing on
__GNU__".
> And
> refusing to use something like asprintf, is just duplicating code which is
> already in the glibc. It should be up to the maintainers if they want to
> eliminate the glibc dependencies.
You are right here.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org brinkmd@debian.org
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org marcus@gnu.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
Reply to: