delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp/2004/05/04/06:45:17

X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: SIGABRT in djgpp 1.07
Date: 4 May 2004 10:43:47 GMT
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <c77s53$lg8u$1@ID-231750.news.uni-berlin.de>
References: <yzzlc.12749$Gq1 DOT 9864 AT fe2 DOT columbus DOT rr DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ac3b07.physik.rwth-aachen.de (137.226.33.205)
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1083667427 704798 D 137.226.33.205 ([231750] 10357)
X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

B Thomas <thomasb AT math DOT ohio-state DOT edu> wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to port an X-Windows application to MSDOS
> using Desqview/X 2.10 and a DJGPP development environment
> that comes along with it (version 1 - see http://www.chsoft.com/dv/).

That's rather heavy reconstructive archeology you're doing there, man.
DJGPP V1 is ancient history.

> GCC complains that it can not find the definition of the signal
> SIGABRT. This is indeed not there in sis/signals.h . 
> Would SIGKILL be a good substitute? Could you please advice.

Hard to tell.  It depends on the usage.  SIGABRT has a distinctly
different meaning from SIGKILL.  The major difference is that SIGABRT
can have a handler installed which will be called, and which can do
some useful work, like freeing OS resources used by the processes
which may remain locked otherwise.  SIGHUP or SIGINT would be closer
matches than SIGKILL.

> Also if you are aware of a better solution to porting X-Windows
> application to DOS , please do suggest.

There once was a port of the core X libraries to DJGPP V1 without the
need for Desqview/X (which was expensive back then), but that would have
all the same problems you're already encountering.

I'm not aware of any actively maintained "good" solution.  The problem
may just be too huge for that.  It's like a clash of cultures.  DOS is
single-tasking, single-user and doesn't intrinsically support any kind
of networking, whereas X11 is multi-user and network-oriented.  In a
nutshell: the best solution might be to forget about porting and
either run it on some other system (Cygwin on Win32 comes with X11),
or rewrite the entire GUI part from scratch, to be used on DOS.

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019