[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >*) If I understand you you correctly and you like to see a tool that is able
> >to
> >do this with any unknown random feature. You would always hand code tests
> >for
> >some of the OS features.
>
> Well, in some way. But you could have a library with a lot of common
> features and symbols.
The main problem is with the functions that may be there but in an unknown
library and that you need to have a person with intimate knowledge of the
target
OS in order to write such a test. This is sometimes as crazy as knowing that
Microsoft declares struct timeval in Winsock2.h.
Another probblem may be that many people overestimate the features of autoconf.
It is always possible to create a program that has a safe fallback without
using a feture but autoconf does not help to find crazy places for definitions
on unknown OS.
> People also do not test for all the things they use (which is wrong
> but also cumbersome; all you can really rely on, I think, is the ANSI C
> library function set.
If you write a program the right way, you will hardly see that it has been
written in a truely portable way. Few people have the skills to do this...
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
[email protected]
