[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FYI: `Document' qnx (Was: Various systems)

From: Pavel Roskin
Subject: Re: FYI: `Document' qnx (Was: Various systems)
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 21:04:59 -0500 (EST)

Hello, Akim!

>       * doc/autoconf.texi (Systemology): New section.
>       Some about QNX 4.

Please undo this patch. We should not document operating systems in the
Autoconf manual.

> address@hidden is a realtime operating system running on Intel architecture
> +meant to be scalable from the small embedded systems to hundred
> +processor super-computer.  It claims to be @sc{posix} certified. More

What if QNX is ported to ARM? What if hundreds CPUs become thousands? What
if somebody buys QNX? What if it forks?

In short, autoconf.texi is not the best place to keep this kind of

> +information is available on the @href{, @sc{qnx} home page},
> +including the @href{, @sc{qnx}

I bet that nobody who needs that URL will search for it in the Autoconf

I don't know any autoconf related issues directly related to the OS except
maybe the command line lenght limit and executability of shell scripts.

Everything else belongs to "Shellology" or "Limitation of usual tools"
or to yet to be written "Quirks in system headers" and "Quirks in system

Finally, it's not the autoconf's way to deal with static OS'es. The
autoconf's way is to deal with known problems in possibly unknown
combinations :-)

Pavel Roskin

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]