David Kirkby Ph.D, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] former email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web page: http://www.david-kirkby.co.uk Amateur radio callsign: G8WRB
On 21 Feb 2003, Paul Eggert wrote: > "Dr. David Kirkby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > If the developers insist on dropping backward compatibility, would it > > not be better to at least do a test for old hardware/software > > I wouldn't bother myself, because such a test would be a maintenance > hassle. We don't have the resources to keep track of all the quirks > of ancient hardware. We have enough trouble keeping track of the > oddities of live systems. > > At some point, when a system is no longer active, it is better for all > concerned if we simply drop support for it. The reality is that GNU > developers have limited resources, and efforts expended on inactive > systems draw needed resources away from more important areas. > > > Should well written software not respond with informative messages, no > > matter how invalid the user input? > > This is not a question of invalid user input. This is a question of > bugs in the operating system. Autoconf-generated scripts, no matter > how well-written, cannot survive arbitrary OS bugs. Okay my apology, 'user input' was not the correct term. However, if I tried to install a piece of software that only run on Windoze 2000 and XP, on a Windoze 95 machine, I would expect the software to have the sense to tell me that it is not supported on Windoze 95. Perhaps that is a better analogy.
