On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 13:08:01 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 10/9/2011 10:15, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Well, I think you probably would - some of the compiled code would
>> already be in object form, and the compiler wouldn't have to compile it
>> again.
> 
> Nope. This was one giant compile of one source file. (Well, lots of
> nested includes, etc.) I didn't have to log back in, restart the
> compile, or anything like that. Plus, of course, on Linux, you'd have a
> corrupted output file, because Make doesn't check that the compile
> finished, only that the object code has a timestamp later than the
> source code.

I'll have to take your word for it.  I've worked on a lot of different 
systems and have never seen that kind of behaviour before.

>> The thing is that on Linux, if you have a problem and report it,
>> there's a far better chance it'll be fixed quickly.
> 
> Probably true. Unless like you're a giant corporation or something,
> yeah.

Even then, I've seen issues in Windows and other commercial operating 
systems that were left as-is even when a big corporation made noise.

In fact, I remember my friend at Microsoft (whom I mentioned before) 
telling me that those laptops they bought - the manufacturer wouldn't 
make drivers for them for Windows Vista.  Microsoft ended up returning 
the 15,000 laptops they had just purchased because the vendor wouldn't 
address that issue.  I understand they bought replacements from some 
other hardware manufacturer.

>>> I'm not describing faults. I'm describing "catching up with other more
>>> popular systems."
>>
>> It's good to see Windows catching up with Linux, isn't it?  Some of the
>> features in Win8 have been available in Linux for years. ;)
> 
> And vice versa.

Sure, each learns from the others.

Except that one tends to patent and sue (or imply a patent and sue or 
extort) when the other doesn't.

Jim

Post a reply to this message