Mailing List Archive

>i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
>all worked there easily enough.

This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they
are built and run exclusively in the POSIX subsystem, thus walling them
completely and utterly off from *all* useful features of NT. POSIX subsystem
programs can't do graphics (just as one example of a useful feature they
are denied), and they can't even invoke non-POSIX programs. For all practical
purposes NT is not POSIX and no one wishing to do useful work on NT would
ever consider the POSIX subsystem as a useful resource to include in their
toolbox :-(.
--
Tom.Horsley@mail.hcsc.com
Home: 511 Kingbird Circle Delray Beach FL 33444
Work: Harris Computers, 2101 W. Cypress Creek Rd. Ft. Lauderdale FL 33309
Support Project Vote Smart! They need your support in non-election years too!
(email pvs@neu.edu, 1-800-622-SMART, http://www.vote-smart.org)

>i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
>all worked there easily enough.

This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they
are built and run exclusively in the POSIX subsystem, thus walling them
completely and utterly off from *all* useful features of NT. POSIX subsystem
programs can't do graphics (just as one example of a useful feature they
are denied), and they can't even invoke non-POSIX programs. For all practical
purposes NT is not POSIX and no one wishing to do useful work on NT would
ever consider the POSIX subsystem as a useful resource to include in their
toolbox :-(.
--
Tom.Horsley@mail.hcsc.com
Home: 511 Kingbird Circle Delray Beach FL 33444
Work: Harris Computers, 2101 W. Cypress Creek Rd. Ft. Lauderdale FL 33309
Support Project Vote Smart! They need your support in non-election years too!
(email pvs@neu.edu, 1-800-622-SMART, http://www.vote-smart.org)

>>no, sorry, i don't know anything about the alien port.
>>but i don't know why sdbm or DB_File shouldn't be there.
>>keith says that DB_File even works without an operating
>>system (ie. ms-dos). i would have thought that since
>>nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have all worked
>>there easily enough.
>
>NT's POSIX sub-system is only 1003.1 compliant, barely enough to port
>"cat" and "ls" over from Unix.

That's a pity. You'd hope that things like open, read, write,
and seek would work. I'm quite certain they've passed
test suites and won law suits about their purported compliance
with open standards.

--tom

Strange sunspot activity caused tom@amber.ssd.hcsc.com (Tom Horsley) to write:
| >i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
| >all worked there easily enough.
|
| This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they

[snip]

Am I the only one who's seen this message about a dozen times?

-spp

Tom (and everyone),

I keep getting your message over and over again. I think I'm up to
copy number 7.

Do you have some idea of what's going on?

-Scott


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: AnyDBM_file with NTPerl
Author: Tom.Horsley@hawk.hcsc.com at Internet
Date: 11/28/95 7:44 AM


>i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
>all worked there easily enough.

This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they
are built and run exclusively in the POSIX subsystem, thus walling them
completely and utterly off from *all* useful features of NT. POSIX subsystem
programs can't do graphics (just as one example of a useful feature they
are denied), and they can't even invoke non-POSIX programs. For all practical
purposes NT is not POSIX and no one wishing to do useful work on NT would
ever consider the POSIX subsystem as a useful resource to include in their
toolbox :-(.
--
Tom.Horsley@mail.hcsc.com
Home: 511 Kingbird Circle Delray Beach FL 33444
Work: Harris Computers, 2101 W. Cypress Creek Rd. Ft. Lauderdale FL 33309
Support Project Vote Smart! They need your support in non-election years too!
(email pvs@neu.edu, 1-800-622-SMART, http://www.vote-smart.org)

>Strange sunspot activity caused tom@amber.ssd.hcsc.com (Tom Horsley) to write:
>| >i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
>| >all worked there easily enough.
>|
>| This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they

>[snip]

>Am I the only one who's seen this message about a dozen times?

Well, Larry and I and Raphael haven't cuz we drop dup messages,
but my Deutscher twin and the rest of the world probably has.

--tom

Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 07:44:17 -0500
From: tom@amber.ssd.hcsc.com (Tom Horsley)
Cc: szurgot@itribe.net, ntperl@mail.hip.com
References: <9511271707.AA19171@aachen.ericsson.se>
Reply-To: Tom.Horsley@hawk.hcsc.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-ntperl@mail.hip.com
Precedence: bulk

>i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
>all worked there easily enough.

This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they
are built and run exclusively in the POSIX subsystem, thus walling them
completely and utterly off from *all* useful features of NT. POSIX subsystem
programs can't do graphics (just as one example of a useful feature they
are denied), and they can't even invoke non-POSIX programs. For all practical
purposes NT is not POSIX and no one wishing to do useful work on NT would
ever consider the POSIX subsystem as a useful resource to include in their
toolbox :-(.
--
Tom.Horsley@mail.hcsc.com
Home: 511 Kingbird Circle Delray Beach FL 33444
Work: Harris Computers, 2101 W. Cypress Creek Rd. Ft. Lauderdale FL 33309
Support Project Vote Smart! They need your support in non-election years too!
(email pvs@neu.edu, 1-800-622-SMART, http://www.vote-smart.org)

I do not know what going on but I've gotten this message
about 10 times now and it is getting annoying.

Mike

>This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they
>are built and run exclusively in the POSIX subsystem, thus walling them
>completely and utterly off from *all* useful features of NT. POSIX subsystem
>programs can't do graphics (just as one example of a useful feature they
>are denied), and they can't even invoke non-POSIX programs. For all practical
>purposes NT is not POSIX and no one wishing to do useful work on NT would
>ever consider the POSIX subsystem as a useful resource to include in their
>toolbox :-(.

So what you're saying is that claiming "NT is a POSIX-compliant system" is a
marketing lie. I hate it when companies lie, especially big companies with
money to make their lies seem like features.

Why am I unsurprised? :-(

--tom

>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen Potter <spp@psa.pencom.com> writes:

Stephen> [snip]

Stephen> Am I the only one who's seen this message about a dozen
Stephen> times?

Stephen> -spp

Nope. Just got another one too.

--
Caleb T. Deupree
Cincom Systems, Inc. ;; not an official representative of Cincom Systems
cdeupree@cincom.com

spp,
NO, you're not the only one. But by now I think Tom realized that and shutdown the loop.
Please keep this *GOOD* source of information CLEAN.
Thank's a lot
Jose Contreras.

> From ntperl-owner@mail.hip.com Tue Nov 28 16:43 EST 1995
> To: Tom.Horsley@hawk.hcsc.com
> Cc: szurgot@itribe.net, ntperl@mail.hip.com
> Subject: Re: AnyDBM_file with NTPerl
> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:58:59 -0600
> From: Stephen Potter <spp@psa.pencom.com>
> Sender: owner-ntperl@mail.hip.com
> Content-Type> : > text>
> Content-Length: 352
>
> Strange sunspot activity caused tom@amber.ssd.hcsc.com (Tom Horsley) to write:
> | >i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
> | >all worked there easily enough.
> |
> | This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they
>
> [snip]
>
> Am I the only one who's seen this message about a dozen times?
>
> -spp
>

At 1:58 PM 11/28/95, Stephen Potter wrote:
>Strange sunspot activity caused tom@amber.ssd.hcsc.com (Tom Horsley) to write:
>| >i would have thought that since nt is POSIX compliant, that it should have
>| >all worked there easily enough.
>|
>| This is a common misconception. NT programs are only POSIX compliant if they
>
>[snip]
>
>Am I the only one who's seen this message about a dozen times?
>
>-spp

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have seen it more than a dozen times. Yesterday I got one about every 10
to 30 minutes.