case-by-case basis (e.g. OpenSSH). They never said they would produce portable software and they don't owe it to anyone.
-
-
Replying to @volatile_void @RichFelker
besides making that much software that were both secure and portable seems beyond the reach of volunteers, so you are accusing…
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @volatile_void @RichFelker
them of not doing something that's impossible (I certainly didn't see anyone else do it either, volunteer or professional)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @volatile_void @RichFelker
I mostly agree with this approach. Everybody is free to do whatever they like.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ch3root @RichFelker
E.g., to write their sw in GNU C or abuse C in any other way, whether they understand what they do or not. Right?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ch3root @RichFelker
And compiler devs are free to implement whatever language they like, e.g. std C and not what others think of or want.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ch3root @RichFelker
(What is not ok is misleading others about provided guarantees.)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ch3root @RichFelker
OTOH it's not surprising that others are not happy about their choices.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ch3root
If you're making FOSS that's actively hostile to all but one OS/env, expect others to be unhappy & replace or fork it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @ch3root
I'm pretty sure that's the(ir) intended point
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Wasn't disagreeing just restating my own formulation/take on it.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.