Hi, On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:11 AM, C. Masloch <c...@bttr-software.de> wrote: >> In very rare cases only, though. > > Irrelevant.
Maybe to you and me, but most developers seem to weigh the issue with how much time and effort vs. how important it is. To them, it makes perfect sense to ignore things that don't bother them personally or that most people won't encounter. While that's not a great attitude for a perfectionist, it's probably fine for people with lots of other (boring) things to do. >> Admittedly nobody wants corruption, but I don't think most people rely >> on deleting open files (except POSIX, so it's probably only a problem >> when porting GNU stuff to DJGPP). > > Inaccurate. RBIL's notes seldom refer to programs that target POSIX. My point is that I'm not aware of any experienced DOS developer trying to delete an open file. It's kinda obviously a bad idea. So I don't think it's a widespread problem. The only example I could think of would be hidden-behind-the-scenes assumptions when porting from POSIX (which has accidentally bit a few ports before). N.B. I personally consider it a bad idea to use such (unnecessary?) POSIX assumptions, esp. when GNU code is used in other environments, but some developers feel otherwise. >> practically "nobody" (or not enough) has >> encountered this "bug" > > Over-abundant usage of quotation marks. Can you think of (or preferably cite) anybody having run into this before? For FreeDOS? In recent years? In any big projects? I can't. Hence nobody. But since my experience is not all-exhaustive, I tried to make it obvious that it could have happened. But it's still somewhat unlikely (from my admittedly limited perspective). Otherwise it would've been fixed (or at least whined about ad nauseum). >> frequently enough to care to even whine, much >> less fix it themselves, so far. Obviously I'm in favor of fixing it >> (esp. in lieu of "just using Linux"), but I'm not a kernel dev. > > Yeah, right now am uninterested in putting effort into GPLed C code. Well, the whole point of FreeDOS existing at all is that MS dropped the ball, and they wanted a free alternative that they could update and share freely. While you and I may prefer BSD-ish licenses for various reasons (esp. since if a developer hates the GPL, they won't contribute at all, which seemingly defeats the point), the majority of enthusiasts by far prefer and use GPLv2, esp. here in FreeDOS (hi, Jim!). GPL isn't bad, per se, just annoying, too long, and I'm tired of reading endless arguments about its finer points (just code, damn it, screw the license, who cares? just make it public, free for all, it's not munitions, for freak's sake, lighten up, blah). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
