From: bob@dalek.mwc.com (Bob Hemedinger)
Newsgroups: comp.os.coherent
Subject: Re: Thoughts on porting software/tips...
Date: 3 Sep 92 20:17:12 GMT
Reply-To: "Coherent operating system" <COHERENT@indycms.bitnet>

> Many of the so called 'ports' of USENET software have been lacking in
> consistency/quality.  They have really (mostly) been 'hacked up' to work under
> Coherent and not 'ported' (i.e. many features do not work as they should or
> work poorly(i.e. the CNEWS port) I [previously] suggested that you (since you
> guys are supposed to really know your product) supply your user base with a
> short introductory guide to porting USENET type software to Coherent.  I never
> got a response on this so I can only speculate that it was tossed the last
> time... Yes, I have had some success with small ports to Coherent, but I think
> that it had to do with the simplicity of the programs.  It would be great if a
> Coherent user could take something posted to comp.sources.unix and just 'make
> it'...

Cnews, while a good example of the point you're making, is probably an extreme.
(Why do I suddenly feel some killer stares?) It think that the term 'port' can
be interpretted several ways, from just making the thing run, to not only
making it run, but fully conditionalizing the sources and docs as well. Many
users are happy just to have the software running under Coherent, although
others would also like to know more about the porting process.

Even if we were to document how to port stuff to Coherent, it would be
futile to some degree in the short and long runs. What does one do when
someone does not follow the steps outlined? Not post their port to be
publicly available? Public ridicule? Burning in efigy? What about relatively
inexperienced people learning programming, 'porting' existing software
as part of their learning experience? This would be probably help them
in some aspects, but would it also be an unwanted burden?

I look at it as more of a philosophical issue and take the side that
says it ain't broke, its just annoying at times, don't fix it. Given some
of the programming questions raised when some people call us saying that the
compiler is broken, I would fear for my sanity about the phone calls & email
that adding this information to our manual [cw]ould result in. This would also
take us in a direction of teaching people how to program. This is not a
direction we want to take. Our support roles have never been defined around the
premise that we should be teaching programming in tech. support. No one in
tech is evaluated or trained extensively on that premise.

>         - I really want to try running X but since 4.0 is text based I
>           will have to wait for or try to port on my own...  What
>           suggestions (if any) do you have for such a project?  :-)
>

X will rely upon many development issues we have to address. It will not
be an easy task.

The rest of your porting questions are best answered by the readers of the
newsgroup.

--
		   MWC Technical Support (bob@mwc.com)
(====================]          _____
         \\             (===================)
   (======\\======]         /// ~~~~~	      Are you sure it isn't time
           \\/             ///	              for a colorful metaphor?
    ===========================
     =========================(
Newsgroups: comp.os.coherent