Re: [sr #110403] autoconf-2.70 trips bug in here-doc handling in OmniOS /bin/sh

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > I would recommend to just document the problem and workaround in two places:
> > 1) in the OmniOS community,
> > 2) at https://gitlab.com/ghwiki/gnow-how/-/wikis/Platforms/Configuration for
> > GNU people.
> 
> That seems reasonable.

OK, what can I write in (2)? Are the following values right?

solaris11omnios-x86-32-gcc  CC="gcc -m32 -O2"  CXX="g++ -m32 -O2" CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/bash

solaris11omnios-x86-64-gcc  CC="gcc -m64 -O2"  CXX="g++ -m64 -O2" CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/bash

Or, if you want, I can let you edit this table.

> This Google reference (which is likely based on Google Search data) is 
> very annoying to me and it seems irrelevant.  There is no need to 
> diminish a viable free operating system.

I didn't purposely diminish OmniOS. But Zack asked for our thoughts on
how to deal with a bug. As usual, "add workaround to the code" and
"add workaround to the documentation" are viable alternatives. In my
opinion, the size of the user base does play a role. If every other
circumstances were equal, I would spend more time on a workaround for
FreeBSD than on a workaround for OmniOS. And I would recommend the same
thing to Zack.

How to estimate the size of the user base of an OS? Like you, I dislike
Google. But their trends site is a way to do such estimations, and I know
of no other or better way. (For packages, but not for OSes, there is also
the Debian popularity contest.)

> In a similar spirit, I should point out that Illumos is doing better 
> than CLISP according to trends.google.com since the limited 
> popularlity is stable and not dwindling. ;-)

Indeed, CLISP failed to achieve world domination. JavaScript did, instead.
I failed. ;-)

Bruno