[Debburn-devel] What is going on?

[Albert Cahalan]

On 9/19/06, Albert Chin <debburn-devel at mlists.thewrittenword.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:53:38AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> >
> > [Albert Cahalan]
> > > Note that a C99 requirement merely rules out many compilers.
> > > You can use gcc on Windows, even without Cygwin.
> >
> > Well, I didn't just mean the compiler features, but also the runtime.
> > For the compiler it would be nice to rely on <inttypes.h> (especially
> > int64_t), but there's also C99 library APIs like strtoll() (which
> > obviously wasn't in C89 because 'long long' wasn't).  Being able to
> > rely on int64_t, but not things like strtoll, is still a bit limiting.
...
> > I'm sure there's a healthy userbase for Solaris and the BSDs/Darwin.  I
> > don't know whether anyone cares about old, posix-challenged Unixes for
> > this sort of thing anymore.
>
> We care about AIX, IRIX, HP-UX, Tru64 UNIX, and Solaris. CMake needs
> some work on these platforms which we'll hopefully get to soon then we
> can try building on the platforms we have.

Please be more specific: the OS itself (perhaps with gcc, which
most people install anyway) or the OS with vendor compiler?
On every Solaris and Tru64 I've ever used, gcc was installed.
If you don't have that, you probably want binaries anyway.

As for your OS choices: MacOS and OpenBSD are easier to
support than Tru64. (they have easily usable device names)
They are also more popular, and don't even have a non-gcc
compiler in significant use. Killing off the non-POSIX platforms
is very nice though!

BTW, login access to any of these systems would be
very helpful. Unfortunately the CD burning itself is a bit
of a problem without root access, but perhaps some of
these systems can be configured to no require that.
We also need a robot to drop in a fresh CD...