HP3000-L Archives

November 2001, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: OT: Linux
From:
Peter da Silva <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Peter da Silva <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:16:41 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines) 
In article <[log in to unmask]>,
David T Darnell  <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Posix compliance, if 100%, would enable 100% portability of code
> between any two 100% Posix compliant OSes regardless of hardware,
> assuming that only POSIX compliant APIs were used, and any third party
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> stuff called was the same on both systems.

There's the devil.

Consider how Microsoft managed to create a POSIX subsystem that was, well,
completely useless and POSIX compliant. The APIs as described in the POSIX
specs are pretty minimal.

--
 `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
  'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."
                                                       -- [log in to unmask]
         Disclaimer: WWFD?

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2