[Debburn-devel] What is going on?

[Albert Chin]

On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 10:48:17AM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> 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.

AIX 4.3.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3
HP-UX 10.20, 11.00, 11.11, 11.23/PA, 11.23/IA
IRIX 6.5
Redhat Linux 7.1, 9
RHEL 2.1/x86, 3/x86, 3/amd64, 4/x86, 4/amd64
Solaris 2.6, 7, 8, 9, 10/SPARC, 10/x86
Tru64 UNIX 5.1

All with the _vendor_ C compiler.

> 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!

I imagine any non free OS would be more difficult to support.

-- 
albert chin (china at thewrittenword.com)