From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Aug 13 5:22:41 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from axl.noc.iafrica.com (axl.noc.iafrica.com [196.31.1.175]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9FD157D7 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 05:21:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sheldonh@axl.noc.iafrica.com) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.noc.iafrica.com) by axl.noc.iafrica.com with local-esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 11FGLF-0002Ue-00; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:21:49 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Peter Jeremy Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, gram@cequrux.com Subject: Re: New tests for test(1) In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:36:24 +1000." <99Aug13.151658est.40345@border.alcanet.com.au> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:21:49 +0200 Message-ID: <9587.934546909@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:36:24 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > It would be nice, but there are portability issues. Hi Peter, I'm only replying to your mail because you're the last person to mention portability as a case againsdt NetBSD's test(1). Just how many other platforms need to support an _extension_ that is _fully_ backward compatible before we'll consider implementing it? With this attitude driving us, we'll end up being the only OS that doesn't support a number of fetures, all in the name of portability. :-) Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message