Brian Ginsbach <ginsbach@cray.com> wrote on Wed, 16 Jul 2003
at 11:44:47 -0500 in <20030716164446.GB10882@bukharin.us.cray.com>:

> > 	are we targetting to make applications in usr.bin to be portable across
> > 	multiple platforms? (this is what you meant)  if so, every usr.bin/foo
> > 	has to have GNU configure script.  therefore, i guess this is not the
> > 	"portability" netbsd is targetting.
> 
> Why not?  Good code (which I believe has always been one of the
> underlying principles of NetBSD development) should be portable.
> I disagree with every usr.bin/foo having a GNU configure script.
> (Gross!  Why on earth GNU configure?  It certainly is not the be-all
> end-all of portability.) Portable code makes for good code.  What
> you maybe able to get away with under one OS/compiler combination
> may bite you on another.  It can help point out sloppy code.

I'd like to support Brian here. While I don't think we should make
every program that is part of NetBSD work on other platforms, I think
gratutiously breaking support for other platforms where it exists is
wrong.

Desupporting dead OSes like Ultrix is fine; desupporting live OSes like
Unicos and Solaris is not.

I certainly have knowledge of many cases where portions of NetBSD have
been compiled on other operating systems to address limitations of the
userlands of those OSes, and it is a useful ability to retain.

I also object to the way in which the change was run through in the face
of objection in relatively short order, without allowing much time for
comment.

--jhawk