Re: portability?
Hubert Feyrer <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006, Ben Collver wrote: > As far as Chuck is concerned, I am not worthy. But he said something > that caught my eye. "I'm not interested in recoding C applications. My > experience indicates that most applications are hardware-dependent." > What does he mean? That solutions to problems tend to involve specific > hardware, and that portability is over-rated? Operating Systems exist to provide abstract, hardware-*independent* interfaces to applications. Without that, we'd get the kind of "portability" common in the Windows-world, where a "portable" application runs on Window 95, NT *and* XP. This can't be real... See also my article ``What Makes An Operating System "Portable"?'' at http://www.feyrer.de/NetBSD/portability/portability.html. - Hubert