James Carlson wrote: > Glenn Fowler writes: [snip] > > now there may be some narrow path of cc/ccs flags/executables && uname -r > > matching > > that I could set up to make compatible binaries for all solaris > > but even then am I crippling later releases for the sake of compatibility > > with earlier ones? > > and I also have N-1 other target architectures with possibly > > worse version management problems, > > and finally, building a.out's is (ideally) 1% of my job > > > > therefore, HOSTTYPE=(os)[(differentiating-number)].(architecture)[(-bits)], > > sol8.i386, sol11.i386-64 etc. > > I think that's still missing the point. > > This project is integrating ksh93 into ON.
Right... but the Makefiles follow the exactly the definitions what is used by upstream. Remember we do not want to fork() the codebase... > Once that's done, there's > no way that the ON source will be used to build a binary for some > other release. Having Solaris-versioning-dependent objects in the > deliverables is a syntax error. Ok... what should I do in this case ? For now the only thing which would AFAIK work here is to add a comment to the OS/Net Makefiles that the definition is not perfect and should be reworked somehow together with upstream to match the official Sun/Solaris version system. Would that be acceptable (BTW: Please read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2007-February/002308.html) ? ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
