[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure? No!
From: |
Helge Hess |
Subject: |
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure? No! |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:57:06 +0100 |
"Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote:
> Not a point against deep directory structure, but on the contrary,
> showing that it should be deepened, or at least, we should add sub os
> tags such as gnu-linux-redhat-6.1, gnu-linux-redhat-7.0,
> gnu-linux-mandrake-7.0, gnu-linux-debian-potatoe...
Hm, I think this is wrong. Actually most (compile time) stuff will be
portable between the different Linux versions. Eg we build all our SuSE
and Redhat pkg on a SuSE 6.2, which works perfect.
We had most problems with changing glibc's (eg when going SuSE 6.1->SuSE
6.2), maybe the libc could be reflected.
> (*) Even if the range has reduced, I understand that MS-Windows-NT
> also runs on a range of different architectures. Who are we to say
> that no MS-Windows-NT administrator may install a shared deep
> directory structure for his GNUstep system and applications to be
> used on both MS-Windows-NT-i586 and MS-Windows-NT-alpha, or whatever.
You have indeed different archs on NT, even without the cpu ! Eg
ix86-mingw32 and ix86-cygwin32 and ix86-uwin and ...
Helge
--
SKYRIX Software AG - http://www.skyrix.com
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure?, Frederic, 2001/01/09
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure?, Dennis Leeuw, 2001/01/10
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure?, Nicola Pero, 2001/01/10
FW: Flattened GNUstep structure?, Yann Le Guen, 2001/01/09
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure?, Jason H Clouse, 2001/01/10
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure?, Gregory Casamento, 2001/01/10
Re: Flattened GNUstep structure?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2001/01/11