Brian Utterback <[email protected]> wrote: > I have seen no indication that anyone has put any effort whatsoever > into preventing the integration of star. I have seen a number of > people that started on the effort and then stop once they found out > that the effort is more than they realized. Removing existing stuff is
If this is the case, then it is a result of expecting a badly working build system and supplying unneeded workarounds for problems that do not exist. If you compare the build system with others, you you will understand that in contrary to what (unfortunately) many other build systems do, it just works out of the box and does not need any tricks. Due to the fact that the build system used by ON is half the way between the ancient system used by most software with a FSF history and modern build systems like the systems from AST and the one from me, it looks a bit strange that people from Sun believe that they need more effort to call a modern build system. > that the effort is more than they realized. Removing existing stuff is > often harder than adding new stuff. Adding duplicate stuff often takes > a lot of justification. Thus the road ahead for star in Solaris is > rockier than it appears at first glance. Isn't this a wonderful proof for the statement: "We cannot afford cheap solutions"? To me, it looks like a problem in the road.... 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/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
