From:	Eric Backus <ericb AT lsid DOT hp DOT com>
Subject:	Re: pbmplus, binutils, dld323, etc
To:	mcastle AT mcs213k DOT cs DOT umr DOT edu
Date:	Mon, 24 Aug 92 10:29:37 PDT
Cc:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu (djgpp)
Mailer:	Elm [revision: 66.25]

> I am currently also trying to compile zoo210 with djgpp.  Anyone
> else done this??  My major problem is lack of library support.  1.08
> seems to have some of the missing functions though (utime is my
> current stumbling back).  I've found the function in libc.a, but I
> couldn't find it in a header file any where (but, I'm in the process
> of unpacking it at the moment anyway, so I may find it yet).  I'm
> wondering if I'll get more or less speed out of zoo210 under djgpp
> (my initial guess is a lot less speed, but it's worth the try).
> Since it's a lot of file i/o, that means lots of switches between
> real and protected more, and I doubt that zoo use much 32 bit stuff,
> except for maybe some hashing functions.  Most of the lzw and
> huffman stuff is at the bit level, I assume, and unless 386 code for
> shifts is much faster than 8086 code on the same machine, I don't
> expect much speed up there.  But, it's a fun project, none-the-less.
>
> Eric Backus:  Was that zoo you were working on?  Please contact me.
>
> regards,
> Mike Castle

Yes, I ported zoo210 to djgpp.  I'll give you the diffs if you're
interested.  I had to implement a few functions (utime() in
particular) to get it to work correctly.  I find the djgpp version of
zoo somewhat faster than the DOS version.  I also fixed a couple minor
bugs and fixed filter mode to work correctly.
--
				Eric Backus
				ericb%hplsla AT hplabs DOT hp DOT com
				(206) 335-2495

- Raw text -