On Feb 25, 2004, at 1:41 PM, Lawrence Sica wrote:
On Feb 25, 2004, at 4:24 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
Hi all,
On Feb 25, 2004, at 12:45 PM, Waqar Malik wrote:
I think we should choose a platform that has a wide acceptance - i
dunno
whats up with linux now a days, but isnt redhat, debian or mandrake
the
most widely used distributions. Why not choose one of these as a
reference.
I think RedHat now Fedora would be a good choice. Commercial
companies tend
to support that. And YellowDog is based on that as well. I guess we
can take
a vote.
Let me ask the stupid question - given the diversity, why should we
even try to define 'linux'? Why not just have:
platforms darwin linux-fedora linux-yellowdog linux-debian
There would need to be a line drawn somewhere, there are well over a
hundred linux distros available.
But, what if the port behaves differently on other versions of Linux?
Are those handled by variants instead of 'platforms'?
Are we really just asking what our 'reference' platform is that we'll
be defining support for, but in general each version of Linux will
needs to be separately tested and its variants for special cases?
In that case, I figure whomever will be doing primary Linux test builds
for DarwinPorts should get to decide, as long as its not too unusual a
version.
-- Ernie P.
--Larry
"I am only thirty.
And like the cat I have nine times to die."
Lawrence Sica
--------------------------------
lomion@xxxxxxx
http://www.citruspub.net
--------------------------------
|
