Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:06:26 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Gerhard Gruber <sparhawk AT eunet DOT at>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Making Libraries
In-Reply-To: <35a5b661.3601985@news.Austria.EU.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980706110549.26454C-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, Gerhard Gruber wrote:

> That's rather a problem with the typicla DOS programmer. As I see it Windows
> Programmers are often people who came from DOS. and in DOS there was no realy
> discipline in programming. Unix supports shared libraries and there are nor
> real problems. If you need the same library with a different
> version, then you can create links or change the environment and
> everything works fine.

I don't think this has to do with discipline.  I think it has to do
with the level of expectations from software the users install, and
the amount of effort they are prepared to spend maintaining their
systems.

DOS/Windows users generally want the installation be automatic, which
doesn't leave much space for solving conflicts with previous versions
of shared libraries.

Also, I disagree that the same problem doesn't exist on Unix.  If you
have ever maintained a Unix system which needs to install software,
you've probably seen conflicts with old versions of shared libraries
related to X, window managers and such likes.  The difference is that
on Unix these chores are done by a dedicated system manager who
generally knows what she/he is doing, whereas DOS/Windows systems lack
this dedicated individual.