Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Nov 1999 12:24:18 -0500 (EST) | From | <> | Subject | Re: vfork |
| |
On Wed, 10 Nov 1999, Ed Hall wrote:
> As someone who has seen the hubris of numerous Unix vendors in assuming > that portability isn't their problem--especially when it comes to > documentation--it pains me when Linux folks take a similar tack. Looked > at from the perspective of someone coming to Linux from elsewhere in > the Unix world, your attitude looks downright hostile. Such attitudes > belong on Slashdot, not here.
Don't take such opinions as representative of anyone other than the individual that posted it (the same applies to my comment, although I do think that people are generally not hostile to portability issues, rather merely uninformed). Personally, I try to avoid writing non-portable code, but the fact of the matter is that it's impossible to ensure that a piece of code will work properly on an architecture that it hasn't been tested on. That said, the fixes are usually pretty simple.
-ben
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |