Prev: sending/handling INT signal in child processes in bash
Next: Convert UTC seconds to actual time.
From: Nicolas George on 7 Jul 2010 04:13
"Ersek, Laszlo" wrote in message
<Pine.LNX.4.64.1007062249410.13491(a)login03.caesar.elte.hu>:
> Why the hostility towards The Open Group?

It was not hostility towards The Open Group, nor towards you. If it was
hostility, it was towards setting importance to the "certification" in a
technical discussion.

I do not begrudge The Open Group for offering that certification, they have
to earn a living after all, and if they do that by taking money to apple and
oracle and turning it into open standards, that is in fact quite good.

But contributors of a technical programming newsgroup should know better
than to trust that certification: it has no more than a minimal technical
meaning.
From: Ersek, Laszlo on 7 Jul 2010 05:26
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Vincenzo Mercuri wrote:

> if I wanted to write fully POSIX compliant code, in a fully documented
> environment, which one of the freely available OS would you advise me?

I don't have enough experience to compare the available systems and advise
you, sorry :(


> Would the BSD family suit my needs?

Probably, see

http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#Non-registered_Unix-like_systems)


> (or Open Solaris?)

Great idea. Ian, thank you too (<89idb2Fo9cU3(a)mid.individual.net>).

lacos
From: Ersek, Laszlo on 7 Jul 2010 05:38
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Vincenzo Mercuri wrote:

> Is there an option or some way to see what libraries i am effectively
> linking my code against? (Some sort of log of what the linker is doing
> 'under the wood'?)

gcc -v
gcc -print-libgcc-file-name


> And a way to force gcc to use its own libraries as long as I want to use
> the gcc 'freestanding subset' of the C Standard? (or it links its own
> 'subset' by default?)

I suggest looking up at least these options in the gcc manual:
-fno-builtin, -fhosted, -ffreestanding, -nostd*, and whatever they
reference.

lacos
From: Vincenzo Mercuri on 7 Jul 2010 05:39
Ersek, Laszlo ha scritto:

>> Would the BSD family suit my needs?
>
> Probably, see
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#Non-registered_Unix-like_systems)
>

Very kind, thanks!


--
Vincenzo Mercuri


From: Måns Rullgård on 7 Jul 2010 07:06
Ian Collins <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> writes:

> On 07/ 7/10 03:48 PM, Vincenzo Mercuri wrote:
>>
>> Thank you, a final question:
>> if I wanted to write fully POSIX compliant code,
>> in a fully documented environment, which one
>> of the freely available OS would you advise me?
>> Would the BSD family suit my needs? (or Open Solaris?)
>
> I can't speak for the BSDs, but I have found it easier to develop
> portable code on (Open)Solaris and port to Linux than vice-versa. For
> starters, the documentation is very clear as to what is and what isn't
> standard.

I simply go by the specs as published by the Open Group and ignore the
glibc manuals. That way my code almost always runs with no change on
any compliant system.

--
M�ns Rullg�rd
mans(a)mansr.com
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: sending/handling INT signal in child processes in bash
Next: Convert UTC seconds to actual time.