Re: Mozilla plugins
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 03:04:54AM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On Don, 2002-10-10 at 02:45, Petro wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:36:02PM -0400, christophe barbe wrote:
> > > Just want to point the obvious: They have a powerpc plugin that works
> > > perfectly under MacOS-X. So basically that's nearly a zero-effort for them
> > > to provide the community a linux/powerpc binary.
> >
> > Actually, it's even worse than that.
See this bit:
> > I'm doubting there is much hardware specific crap in it, and they
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > support Linux-x86, so it IS a near-zero-effort (hell, all they'd
> > have to do is ask, and I'm sure someone would be willing to compile
> > it for them).
That means that I already assumed that they don't have to deal with:
> A simple compile doesn't deal with portability issues like endianness,
> char (un)signedness, ... Granted, they should have solved at least the
> first one for MacOS.
Look at what they already spport:
MacOSX PowerPC
MacOS Ditto
PocketPC, which is (IIRC) ARM?
OS/2 (talk about a dead platform...)
Solaris on Sparc.
Linux X86
HP-UX Damn, can't remember the chip name.
Irix Mips.
Somehow I don't think endinaness is an issue, given this collection
of chips.
--
On unarmed men | Quit smoking:
Thugs will prey | 170d, 20h ago
California state law | petro@
Keeps it that way | bounty.org
Reply to: