Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!jtc
From: jtc@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (J.T. Conklin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: GNU and the issue of support
Message-ID: <1815@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca>
Date: 10 Sep 90 16:58:06 GMT
References: <9491@ubc-cs.UUCP> <57679@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <46859@bigtex.cactus.org>
Organization: UniFax Communications Inc., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Lines: 51

In article <46859@bigtex.cactus.org> james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) writes:
>This is correct.  Cygnus Software (Michael Tiemann's company I think)
>is an example.  They are a service company, not a product company -
>they do ports of GNU products and support for it.  For example, a
>company needing a compiler for their new HAL-9000 system could hire
>out both the port and and the maintenance (both internal and end user
>support).  This is likely far and away the cheapest way to get a solid
>product in the shortest time.
>
>Now, if someone would just hire out Cygnus to do a gcc/gdb port to SysVr4...

One of the biggest complaints in this forum about the various i386
UNIX vendors (in fact, UNIX vendors in general) is poor software
development tools.

It makes sense that an OS vendor would put a lot of effort into
rectifying this situation, as a good development system allows
third-party developers to port their products to their platforms
easily: People are unlikely to purchase your UNIX system if the
application they need is not available.

Unfortunately, I don't see the situation improving, especially in i386
environments.  SCO still uses the Microsoft Compiler that still
occasionally spills infinitely and is perpetually one rev behind the
DOS version.  ISC has just licensed the LPI C compiler, which a netter
recently compared to COBOL without the OBOL.

Think of what could have been achieved if ISC had spent the licensing
fees to Cygnus or even hired a couple of compiler jocks to bring gcc
up to their standards.

I am tired with fighting with the development systems offered by OS
vendors.  Rather than continuing on with the battle, I have resigned
myself to the fact that I will be required to carry my own development
system arround with me to each system I port to.

	--jtc

PS: 
The above statements outline some of my dissatisfaction with the
current offerings of most vendors.  I am happy to report that not all
of my experiences have been bad.  I recently did the initial port of
our UNIX Facsimile Gateway to the Data General Aviion.  The port went
flawlessly, and the Fax Gateway was up and running within 45 minutes.

PPS:
DG's stock compiler is gcc.

-- 
J.T. Conklin	UniFax Communications Inc.
		...!{uunet,ubc-cs}!van-bc!jtc, jtc@wimsey.bc.ca