Hi at all,
I'm really impressed by the discussion about ksh. But I dont get the point.
Some basic logic says to me that something that's not available does not exist.
So if there is no source for ksh88 it's not a good point to talk about it in an
environment that talks about open source. It's
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 03:23:16PM -0700, Helmar
Wodtke wrote:
ext2fs:
http://www.sun.drydog.com/faq/9.html#9.24
Well, that's like this access to some misconfigured
Windows-Partitions on Linux... It's read-only and I
can access only
one partition (question: also only one if I
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 03:51:31PM -0700, Helmar
Wodtke wrote:
But another thing (since I see you are here and I
remember it): you
made a gcc compilation for OpenSolaris? I found
your name in an
Yes. I built the compiler that can build ON, and did
some of the ON
work to make
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
a) may be the safer way but is not always
necessary. Your example of
Postscript interpreter doesn't fit nearly as well
because you're
talking about (as far as I know) is an
undcoumented proprietary file
format,
Not that it matters
This has to be a libtool bug. When I ask gcc where
libstdc++.la
lives, I get:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/builds/wesolows $
/tonic/gcc-tools/i386/gcc-3.4.3/bin/gcc
--print-file-name=libstdc++.la
/tonic/gcc-tools/i386/gcc-3.4.3/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-pc
-solaris2.10.1/3.4.3/../../../libstdc++.la
$
Keith -- when Joerg says OpenSolaris here, I think
he's actually
referring to SchilliX.
No. He does not do so.
BTW: I'm a little confused about things like to discuss ksh for OpenSolaris: if
it's not available as source, take the open source variant. People that need
101% compatibility can
