If people target Linux, SAY Linux. Do not contribute to the semantic mushiness which is already rife.
-
-
Replying to @jen20 @mj_langford
I put unix in quotes ("for this" referring to interop). Was responding to someone who said "interop with Unix"
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
People target nothing specific. They just add workarounds for platforms they feel morally willing to work with.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Example: WSL is closer to Linux than OSX is. But people are morally unwilling to add WSL workarounds. Why?
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Can you give an examples of WSL workarounds required? I thought it'd be largely POSIX compliant, which is a reasonable target IMO
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
WSL shouldn't be targeting POSIX per se - it should be targeting Linux. Workarounds for stuff that works on Linux proper are bugs in WSL.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Except that people do workarounds en masse for POSIX inconsistencies in OSX. You can say "not my problem", or you can do what pepole ...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
do in OSX and slap a bandaid on it while the upstream bug gets addressed. At least WSL's "radar" is Github Issues.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
OSX doesn't have the explicit goal of targeting full compatibility with someone else though. WSL bugs == SmartOS LX Zone bugs == bugs.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Luckily, the WSL team is super receptive to cases which prove different (as the LX team is), and get them fixed and released quickly.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
OSX claims to be a "certified Unix" but has bugs. But this is a deflection. Regardless, pragmatics say we should work around bugs.
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.