3 ms·
It's worse still. Even on a Linux system with GNU tools, the slightest deviation from the author's system causes "interesting" failures. One recent one I enco
by mansr 17y ago
It's worse still. Even on a Linux system with GNU tools, the slightest deviation from the author's system causes "interesting" failures. One recent one I encountered was glibc refusing to build with GNU binutils 2.20. The configure script was looking for a version of 2.1[3-9] and complained about it being too old otherwise. Then there is the whole cross-compiling issue.
The above notwithstanding, BSD people ought really think twice before opening their mouths. They have one of the most broken systems I know of, missing a huge number of standard (as in POSIX/SUS) features. Some of their system headers even refuse to compile without extra compiler flags.
- l0stman 17y agoCould you be more specific instead of just saying some vague statements without giving any information? What problems have you encountered on *BSD systems?
- mansr 17y agoOK, off the top of my head (not all apply to all forks): - The math library (libm) is incomplete. - The 'nm' command has non-standard syntax. - The 'od' command has non-standard syntax. - System headers require -D_BSD_SOURCE or similar. - System headers disobey standards in other ways. - Not using -fPIC on OpenBSD gives unusable executables.
- tedunangst 17y agoSystem headers should only require BSD_SOURCE if you've asked for strict ansi mode, just like gnu headers require GNU_SOURCE.
- mansr 17y agoThe glibc headers work perfectly in strict C99 mode. The BSD headers do not.
- jvdh 17y agoFreeBSD is actively trying to get to POSIX and C99 conformance, see http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/index.html http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/index.html