HP3000-L Archives

May 2002, Week 2

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:
From:
Dennis Handly <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Dennis Handly <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 14 May 2002 07:32:01 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (57 lines)
Stan Sieler ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
: 1) dropping software:
: almanac          getcollate ...

None of these are C99 or C++ ISO Standard.

These were probably obsoleted on 10.00 and finally removed on 11.0.
They went to a whole new OSF form of NLS.

: 2) moving software:
:    … Some libc APIs were moved to libm, libnsl due to standards/de facto
:    standards and will require a link line change to find the APIs in the
:    new library.  (This breaks some Makefiles)

Yes, but existing executable will continue to run.
There are some STK tools that would probably scan your sources and makefiles
and tell you that.

http://devresource.hp.com/STK/

>From: "Wayne R. Boyer" <[log in to unmask]>
>I'd like to substitute "grossly stupid non-planning...".  I suspect that
>this involves renaming or substituting new subroutines for the 'old'
>ones.

I assume years of notice were given that they were obsolete.

>The intelligent way to eliminate/rename subroutines is to announce that
>they will be phased out in the future and give everyone at least a
>couple of releases to get their code changed over to new subroutines.
Wayne

I assume they did give notice.  And on 10.00, the replacement, Standard
routines were there.

>From: "John R. Wolff" <[log in to unmask]>
>UNIX has never respected and does not value compatibility and UNIX
>users (of all people) should know this.

But Standards are more important.

>In addition the myth of UNIX "standards" is a joke.

But most of Stan's listed routines were obsoleted because they weren't
Standard.

>Why do package vendors supply different editions of the same release of
>their software for the same platform if the OS is transparent?  We found
>this to be true just going to 10.20 HP-UX from 10.01, and it has been true
>for every release I have ever seen or investigated.

Unfortunately we didn't learn our lessons on 10.x and not enough people
came from a MPE background like me.  On 11.x, we are doing better.

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2