[haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: Gabriele Biffi <mlist@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 00:43:18 +0200
Ryan Leavengood wrote:
For me that seems silly. Though for the sake of avoiding feature-creep
and getting R1 out the door maybe that is the best idea. But
considering all this it seems as if R1 will be mostly a tech-demo and
not actually a system people can use. If that is the goal, great, but
that has not been my impression. I cannot use a system without a
modern web browser (I do not think I am alone on this), and for that
we need GCC4, hence my being adamant about this. I really don't want
Haiku to be seen as a toy OS from its first release.
I agree. But compatibility is one of Haiku's goals.
What about providing the default libraries built with GCC2 for
compatibility and the same libraries built with GCC4 but with a
different name, like libbe.haiku.so?
Old apps will be happy, and new GCC4 apps will just need to link against
the new ones.
Regards,
Gabriele
- Follow-Ups:
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- References:
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: philippe.houdoin
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: Axel Dörfler
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: Ryan Leavengood
Other related posts:
- » [haiku-development] To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- » [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
For me that seems silly. Though for the sake of avoiding feature-creep and getting R1 out the door maybe that is the best idea. But considering all this it seems as if R1 will be mostly a tech-demo and not actually a system people can use. If that is the goal, great, but that has not been my impression. I cannot use a system without a modern web browser (I do not think I am alone on this), and for that we need GCC4, hence my being adamant about this. I really don't want Haiku to be seen as a toy OS from its first release.
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: philippe.houdoin
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: Axel Dörfler
- [haiku-development] Re: To __BEOS__ or not to __BEOS__?
- From: Ryan Leavengood