From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Mar 19 06:22:44 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id GAA02828 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 06:22:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA02822 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 06:22:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from cwbone.bsi.com.br ([200.250.250.14]) by who.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.11) with ESMTP id GAA27485 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 06:22:23 -0800 Received: from lenzi (ra12.dial.ufsc.br [150.162.246.12]) by cwbone.bsi.com.br (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA10358 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 11:21:16 GMT Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 11:26:51 -0300 (EST) From: "Lenzi, Sergio" X-Sender: lenzi@lenzi To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Quality of BSD software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hello all. In an answer from a request for information about Win/U here is what they sad: > > Thank you for your interest in Wind/U, which enables you to take > your Windows applications to multiple Unix and VMS platforms > with only a single source required. > > We do not support Linux or FreeBSD, primarily due to the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > quality of the compilers that work with these operating systems. I am very satisfyed with the quality of the BSD compilers and operating system. In fact I think it is better than SCO or UNIXWARE compilers that has bugs in the libc. Can someone please evaluate this and perhaps convince the Win/U that BSD has "quality" compilers???