> From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@cygnus.com>
> Date: 13 Jun 1998 09:05:00 -0700
>
> The actions for both are the same, it's only that when incompatible
> interface are available they'll also will be used. If in this case on
> Linux the llseek function is simply not available people are forced to
> use the right way.
>
> I think you've completely missed one of the threads of the last weeks.
> People complained that Linux programs are so poorly portable. The
> reaction from those who wrote these programs was that they didn't know
> better since they don't have other machines to test.
>
> Actually, e2fsprogs was very portable; I specifically made sure it ran
> on multiple platforms, including Solaris (which at the time supported
> llseek, and not the LFS interfaces).
>
> To say that llseek() is Linux-specific is really lame. As other pointed
> out, AIX and Solaris also supported it, and it predates the LFS spec.
> llseek() was a de-facto industry standard. The fact that glibc thought
> nothing of breaking a de-facto industry standard, and in a really stupid
> way (i.e., removing the prototype while leaving the function call in
> libc --- thus fooling my autoconf test which up until that point worked
> just fine under Linux, Solaris, and AIX), was what I was complaining
> about.
I can relate, there are 2 functions in the irc sofware that I use and this
stuff runs on everything (Solaris, NT, BSD) I even saw some VMS support
in there, but it totally bombs on glibc, perhapse somone would care to
expain what standards strok breaks? The autoconfig thinks the 2 functions
arn't there and incudes it's own.
When I asked I got an angry response from the maintainer wich needless to
say was not favorable toward linux.
Gerhard
-- Gerhard Mack irc admin voyager.starchat.netgmack@imag.net innerfire@starchat.net
As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu