On Wed, January 22, 2014 4:25 pm, Francis Dupont wrote: > In your previous mail you wrote: > >> > That seems like a strawman: who says that there is a "single source" >> of >> > ideas for how to implement randomness? Three large server OSs (Linux, >> > FreeBSD, Windows) all do it differently. >> >> The single source is "your OS". While there are 3 large server OSs, >> there >> is no single application that can obtain randomness from all three >> since >> there is no application that runs on all of them > > => I know many applications which run on these 3 OSs (and more, i.e., > Solaris, AIX and HP-UX too if you limit to still alive OSs). > So either I didn't understand you or we are not talking about the same > thing...
If you take the executable from Solaris and copy it onto your HP-UX machine it will not run. My point was that there were not 3 sources (Paul mentioned 3) available to an application, there is just one: the one that's part of OS that the application happened to be compiled for. >> (and my experience is >> that a single linux application won't necessarily work from version X >> of >> the OS to version Y-- hell, sometimes the source won't even compile). > > => change your application developer? Ha, ha. Funny. I have considered firing myself several times. The issue was not the code I was writing, it is the annoying habit of linux driver developers to change data structures (the one in question was for an 802.11 device) in gratuitous ways that cause breakage. I have never had that problem with freeBSD. In fact, the inability of an application to just compile from one OS release to another is touted as a feature by some of the more zealous linux people. Dan. _______________________________________________ dsfjdssdfsd mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dsfjdssdfsd
