On 19 Nov 2010, at 23:42, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 23:00 +0000, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: <snip>
>> All completely fine - the only point I would like clarification on is "No >> consideration for the converse ability to run software built for illumos on >> Solaris 11". >> >> I'm completely fine with it not being a development concern, but I'm >> struggling to understand why, eg GNU Nano, compiled on Illumos wouldn't work >> on Solaris 11. As far as I know nobody has proposed modifying the compiler >> suites (with Sun Studio we can't, for example) and most 3rd party software >> hasn't been written to use specific Illumos features (yet). So why would a >> binary compiled on Illumos look any different to one compiled on Solaris 11? >> >> I'm definitely *not* asking Illumos to change their stance on this, this is >> more so that myself (and no doubt others) can fully comprehend the >> ramifications/future considerations of the statement. >> >> I think it would be a shame if FOSS software compiled on Illumos/OI didn't >> run on Solaris 11, but obviously it wouldn't be the end of the world. It >> would just be useful. > > We won't go out of our way to bust this, but we won't limit ourselves > either. So if we e.g. add a useful function, perhaps from a new POSIX > standard or perhaps from Linux, and the software is compiled to use it > (because autoconf detects it for example), then the resulting binary > might not work on Solaris 11. Oh right okay, if that's all we're talking about then really this is a big hoo-haa about nothing! I don't think anyone is going to oppose changes like that. It's welcome progress. So I don't see an issue at all - I'm pretty sure our goals are aligned. Alasdair. _______________________________________________ oi-dev mailing list [email protected] http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
