Re: gEDA-dev: DBUS binding to PCB actions

[DJ Delorie <dj-at-NOSPAMdelorie_dot_com>]

> I trust that this is not a remark against GNU, but rather a 
> request for true portability, meaning we can't require any 
> particular libc, etc.

Right.

> True support for these means that they are implicitly supported.  
> That is, it is bad to use #define and autoconf tricks to 
> achieve that support.  All 5 of these should be supported, 
> without explicit knowledge of any of them.

You're talking about the difference between "portable" and "ported".
The first is the more desirable; software that doesn't make
assumptions is better than N conditional assumptions.


_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev