On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thanks for the quick responses Dave and Dejan. Dejans suggested fix for > the structure worked.
Dejan: In that case, could I recommend that we make that change in the source code, so that we can maintain portability and clarity of coding? Any reason not to change it? Any objections? > I am compiling with SunStudio11 and I can see that is not going to work. > I will see about getting gcc loaded on the system. I think we have 3.3 > and 4.0 somewhere about. Ken: I don't know how far you wish to push this, or would have the time to push it. But if you could identify a means of persuading it to compile with the Sun compilers, I would be interested in seeing whether this could be cleanly incorporated into the source code. It would help maintain portability (in this case to different compiler environments) and give us a structure and pathway towards yet further OSes and their compilers. (It will, of course, be a "minority interest"; by far the largest install base is Linux. And of the non-Linux, most of them seem to have gcc available. But it might be an interesting exercise at least...) > Solaris 10 is an impressive OS, more people should try it. Actually I tend to stay with S8 and S9. S10 made so many changes to system boot procedures, and we're locally migrating away from Solaris towards Linux, that the migration to S10 here seemed a poor choice. (But I do run a bit of S10 on a couple of machines.) -- : David Lee I.T. Service : : Senior Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : UNIX Team Leader Durham University : : South Road : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/ Durham DH1 3LE : : Phone: +44 191 334 2752 U.K. : _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
