[PATCH 06/39] win32: add missing system headers

[Rob Landley]

On Monday 19 April 2010 00:52:57 Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> wrote:
> >> > Surely this is a defect in your build environment?  These are standard
> >> > system headers.  Your C library is defective.
> >>
> >> Welcome to Windows.
> >
> > How is a clearly defective build environment busybox's problem?  If mingw
> > doesn't work, either fix it or try cygwin.  Both as open source build
> > environments, and for all I know there's more.  (I don't do windows, but
> > wasn't djgpp a build environment at one point?)
>
> Cygwin would work. But then I would need to carry cygwin1.dll with me.

Statically link then.

> And it sometimes conflicts with other POSIX emulation. Windows is not
> POSIX.

A) Then why care about a program that implements the posix command line with 
common Linux extensions?   (Which is the point of busybox.)

B) Tell that to Microsoft's marketing department, which got it posix 
certification back in the 1990's.

> Mingw is the closet (in terms of open source) thing that
> reflects native Windows development environment (I tried MS Visual
> Studio, just for fun, more header issues there).

BusyBox is not a windows program.  It has never been a windows program.

> They just don't lack the headers, they lack functionality behind those
> headers too.
>
> > If somebody came to the busybox list and went "I want to build against
> > newlib+libgloss, but my build environment hasn't got these headers, I
> > need you to add them to the busybox source for me", there's no way we'd
> > do that.  Your position is that Windows is different?  Special?
>
> Windows is different (call it special if you want). Not a good thing
> though. I'd never work on Windows if I had a choice.

So why do you expect us to?

I told a previous boss I'd rather flip burgers than write code for Windows.

If you could make your changes completely non-intrusive so the non-Windows 
people neither had to look at them nor care about them, that would be one 
thing.  But it sounds like the changes you're proposing CAN'T be done that 
way, they're intrustive to busybox and the rest of the developers will be 
forced to know about them and not break them.

Rob
-- 
Latency is more important than throughput. It's that simple. - Linus Torvalds