Re: portability of xargs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



It it really expected that Autotools should support 32 year old systems?

This feels counter-productive to me.

I have been told by several people (who have much more self-esteem than me) that a build tool called 'cmake' is far more portable than Autotools so maybe we should make support for 32 year old systems cmake's responsibility?

I am fond of systems from the early/mid '90s but it seems better to support POSIX compliant systems with newer software.

People who have somehow figured out how to keep old hardware running without disk drives, electrolytic capacitors, or fans, can install older GNU software first in order to bootstrap sufficiently to a sufficient level of POSIX compliance.

The well-built systems I bought prior to 2007 are already dead or difficult to repair.

I do not see any reason to spend any time at all supporting an OS older than 2008.

Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Public Key,     http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/public-key.txt




[Index of Archives]     [GCC Help]     [Kernel Discussion]     [RPM Discussion]     [Red Hat Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux USB]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux