On 05/25/2011 09:26 AM, Konstantin Andreev wrote: > On 25.05.11 18:47, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 05/25/2011 06:40 AM, Konstantin Andreev wrote: >>> >>> Why do you refer to GCS? I thought that 'autoconf' is intended for >>> most Unix'es, not only GNU. >> >> Autoconf stated goal is to generate configure scripts that run on all >> platforms that comply with the GCS set of minimum prerequisites - it >> so happens that this covers most Unix'es (including proprietary systems). > > Thank you for explanation. > > Just for curiosity, - wouldn't POSIX.2 be a better base for autoconf > portability ? No. My understanding is that the set of programs required by GCS is a strict subset of POSIX.2; so by targetting the stricter GCS subset, we cover more platforms than we would by using POSIX.2 as our minimum. [Disclaimer - I'm more familiar with POSIX 2008, which derives from the original POSIX.1, and I'm not sure how that differs from POSIX.2] Besides, very few systems are actually POSIX compliant (many come close, but that's part of the reason autoconf exists, to work around the places where there are differences). To date, I know of no GNU/Linux system that has ever achieved POSIX certification, although efforts are certainly being made to close the gaps, and you can probably make the counterargument that GNU/Linux systems often tend to comply better than some proprietary systems that have actually passed POSIX compliance certification (due to holes in the certification testsuites). -- Eric Blake eblake@xxxxxxxxxx +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
