Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!news.ppp.de!hcshh.hcs.de!hcswork!hm From: hm@hcswork.hcs.de (Hellmuth Michaelis) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: Request to ``ports'' developers Date: 28 May 94 19:51:53 GMT Organization: HCS Hanseatischer Computerservice GmbH Lines: 22 Message-ID: <hm.770154713@hcswork> References: <2s291q$pnl@meatball.rwwa.com> <2s37a4$mp9@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <VIXIE.94May27220527@office.home.vix.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: hcswork.hcs.de In <VIXIE.94May27220527@office.home.vix.com> vixie@vix.com (Paul A Vixie) writes: [about porting software to a free BSD] >When you add #ifdef's and code to a package, you should always use the least >specific macro that describes the feature you're depending on. Hmm ... What about testing ? What if i had just a 386|Net|FreeBSD for testing ? The only thing i will be SHURE after porting and testing is that it run's on the particular 386|Net|FreeBSD platform/version. This is no offense! You are really right in the quoted sentence above, but i have mixed feelings about it when it comes to the real world. Perhaps i'm just a bit paranoid ;-) hellmuth -- Hellmuth Michaelis HCS Hanseatischer Computerservice GmbH Hamburg, Europe Experience is directly proportional to the amount of equipment ruined (Murphy)