| |||||||||||||
Better than POSIX?Better than POSIX?Posted Mar 17, 2009 19:52 UTC (Tue) by aleXXX (subscriber, #2742)In reply to: Better than POSIX? by sf_alpha Parent article: Better than POSIX?
> I think it also duty of application developers to ensure their Sure, sounds reasonable. But, how to do that ? Most people have one box around, usually running Linux. How should they/we test that our software works fine everywhere ? Ok, one can install a virtual machine and run e.g. FreeBSD or Solaris on it. Not sure how many people do this in their spare time. At least for me it's quite at the top of my TODO. E.g. Kitware has nightly builds and testing for basically all their software on basically all operating systems, i.e. Linux, Windows, OSX, AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, FreeBSD, QNX and others (here's the current dashboard for CMake: http://www.cdash.org/CDash/index.php?project=CMake) But setting this up is quite some effort, you need to find people to host these builds for you. Not every small project can afford this. Alex
(Log in to post comments)
Better than POSIX? Posted Mar 18, 2009 5:45 UTC (Wed) by sf_alpha (guest, #40328) [Link]
Ok. I did not mean to test on every system, Just pay attention to POSIX for ensure data integrity and application work as expected on most of the systems.
If applications is designed to use only Linux with ext3, that is OK, just ignore this problems and rely on Ext3 robustness. Only drawbacks is application is not portable and still MAY LOST DATA WHEN CRASH.
|
|||||||||||||