Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 10th Jan 2013 01:41 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
Thread beginning with comment 548139
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: not all these changes are strictly necessary
by peejay on Thu 10th Jan 2013 15:36
in reply to "RE[8]: not all these changes are strictly necessary"
RE[10]: not all these changes are strictly necessary
by kwan_e on Thu 10th Jan 2013 15:52
in reply to "RE[9]: not all these changes are strictly necessary"
"And as far as I can tell, GNU sed does conform to standard. It just has a little extra that people happen to find useful and use. It's not as though the actual bare minimum implemented by GNU userland tools are somehow nonstandard.
Embrace and extend....
" But not extinguish. It's not like this is part of a master plan to steal all the developers. It's the natural result of having an open system that requires reciprocation. More development happens resulting in even more development - a positive feedback loop.
RE[9]: not all these changes are strictly necessary
by lucas_maximus on Thu 10th Jan 2013 19:15
in reply to "RE[8]: not all these changes are strictly necessary"
RE[10]: not all these changes are strictly necessary
by kwan_e on Thu 10th Jan 2013 23:02
in reply to "RE[9]: not all these changes are strictly necessary"
The GNU tools aren't at fault it is developers that aren't conforming to the standard which is the problem.
It really is that simple. If I want a piece of software to run on another unix whether it is commericial or opensource it is a pain to port as discussed in the article.
It really is that simple. If I want a piece of software to run on another unix whether it is commericial or opensource it is a pain to port as discussed in the article.
What definition of "conforming" are you using? Does "conforming" mean not using extensions? If so, do programs that use, say, Qt libraries, non-conforming because they're not mandated by the POSIX standards?
But as the article and people here say, a lot of people aren't looking to have their things run on other unixes. They're not obligated to, especially since Linux is popular. It's the OpenBSD ports maintainers that want to port software.





Member since:
2007-02-18
And as far as I can tell, GNU sed does conform to standard. It just has a little extra that people happen to find useful and use. It's not as though the actual bare minimum implemented by GNU userland tools are somehow nonstandard.
So GNU does keep the bare minimum. But we shouldn't let interoperability get in the way of providing convenience as long as it doesn't break the standard.
Or is that what we actually prefer?