Gunnar Ritter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Mick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Then perhaps the complaint about the particular use of the term "illegal"
> > is
> > misplaced.
>
> No. Jörg's further derogatory wording ("broken", "defective" etc.)
> leaves no doubt about it. You can hardly claim that people have a
> free choice whether to implement a specification when their software
> becomes "defective" as soon as there is a divergence to it.
Don't you see that what you do here is scrubby?
Any makefile that uses $< in an explicit rule is dubtlessly broken if it
claims to be portable and authors of free software usually claim to
write portable software.
My impression is that you are not interested in a fruitful discussion
but only listen to certain buzzwords and then start to pick on people.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
