On Friday 17 September 2004 08:28 am, Sashmit Bhaduri wrote:

> HAL looks (
> http://freedesktop.org/pipermail/hal/2004-June/000421.html ) to be
> fairly
> portable. There is a difference between BEING linux-specific and
> HAVING linux-specific
> parts when compiled in Linux. That's like saying that Linux isn't
> portable because it has i386-specific code when run on i386.

The concern is that HAL would be dependent upon Linux. For something 
like kfloppy, this is no big deal, just don't use kfloppy. But the 
nature of HAL is very different. One could easily lose major swatchs of 
functionality on non-Linux systems.

I'm not suggesting that this will be the case with HAL, only pointing 
out what the concern is. 

-- 
David Johnson
___________________
http://www.usermode.org