Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/03/29/16:03:52
If I may add my $.02, I would like to see further
development/maintenance
of RSX. As I understand, it's still back in the days of GCC 2.7.x.x, and
now we have EGCS, PGCC, and the standby GCC 2.8.1.
Is anybody maintaining the pkg anymore??? If I honestly thought I could
help, I would, but I doubt that I have skill or time to do so, even
though
I do want to.
I do agree that DJGPP should not become a port to Win32, though I do
believe that we need more support for it. Cygwin, though it may be GPL
or
Pseudo GPL, is still not free, and the backing is hardly there. I would
guess that if somebody really wants commercial Win32 they'll go VC++
(Which I personally think is a bastardization of C++. It's not
cross-platform, it's M$ proprietary, and costs a fortune. The compiler
may
be decent, but the Visual part I have a problem with). Anyway, I would
like to see better support for Win32, partly because DOS will become a
lot
harder to get to in newer versions of Windows. Personally, I intend to
start using Linux, and drop Windows as soon as it is practical. Until
then, I'll probably run a dual-boot.
Yes, I admit that all this is just my opinion, and I am probably wrong
one
a point or two, and if I have offended anyone, my apologies.
DJ Delorie wrote:
> Don't panic!
>
> I've been doing some thinking lately about where DJGPP is going. I've
> concluded to myself that it really isn't *going* anywhere, it's
> *there*. The core code is pretty stable and feature-full. GNU ports
> come out often enough, and we're becoming "just another unix platform"
> for a lot of people. The web pages have pretty much everything I can
> think to add to them (although we can always use more documentation :)
> The big focus these days is on third-party additions (like Allegro)
> and applications.
>
> Cool.
>
> The big question I have for you all is this: What's next?
>
> I don't mean "Let's write application XYZ", I mean for the DJGPP
> project itself. Think BIG. I don't see too many people installing
> DOS these days, and Cygwin is shaping up to be almost as good as DJGPP
> (hey, I can boast - I'm on both teams) so the Win32 systems will see
> less demand for DJGPP over time (I expect, at least). Plus, a lot of
> DJGPP users are switching to Linux or WinNT/Cygwin.
>
> So what are our choices?
>
> Well, we can try to saturate the DOS market. I don't know how to do
> that, unless we spend a fortune on ads in PC magazines :-( Perhaps an
> effort to "spread the word" in other forums (nicely, please) would
> "enlighten the uninformed", but it's for diminishing returns.
>
> We could try to make DJGPP a Windows-native system. I don't think
> this is a good idea because 90% of the value in DJGPP is the way it
> hides DOS, and we'd have to throw it all away and start from scratch
> if we switched to the Win32 API. Plus, Cygwin already does Win32, and
> legally I can't promote such a project because that's what I already
> do for Cygnus. If you like this option, join the cygwin team - you'll
> be much happier, and we can always use more help.
>
> For the same reason, DJGPP for Linux is a bad idea. Heck, DJGPP is a
> port of the Linux tools themselves!
>
> We could overhaul DJGPP again for ELF support and a few other
> fundamental design changes, but why mess with a good thing? Sure,
> we've got a list of bugs to fix (like C++ templates in COFF) but
> they'll get fixed eventually. Such redesigns would have little real
> effect on the project.
>
> So, I'm at a loss as to where we should be focusing our energy at this
> time. Mailing list traffic doubled every year from 1993 to 1997, but
> *dropped* 10% in 1998 (1999 isn't looking too good, either), and
> delorie.com's web server has had a pretty steady load for the last two
> years, even though I've got plenty of spare resources. I think our
> period of growth is over unless we start something new, but what?
>
> So my task for you, my loyal fans, devoted followers, silent lurkers,
> and the occasional tax collector (hiss!) is to help shape the future!
> Let's get those ideas flowing and figure out what the Next Big Thing
> for us will be!
>
> Considerations (but not limitations):
>
> * GPL. We've come a long way with it, no reason to change now.
>
> * Should give something to the community. DJGPP was built by the
> community, the benefits should go to the community.
>
> * Traffic to my web server means money for us, which I turn into more
> servers, bigger disks, faster net connections, time to write CGIs,
> etc. The main DJGPP server is a P166 with 27Gb of disk and a 1Mb/s
> link, but if you folks want to chip in for a PII/450 I'll get one
> ;-) Current traffic just about covers ISP, electric bills, and
> upkeep (about $9,000/year).
>
> * Should be long term and highly visible, so we'll all get rich and
> famous (we hope) through contracts and such.
>
> * Should be something that can grow on its own. For example, if
> personal labor is involved (like consulting), you're limited by how
> much you can do, but a web page, computer program, or software
> package can grow and multiply without needing more people-hours.
> This also frees us up to do other projects when we're done :-)
>
> So crank up those brains, think carefully, and let's hear your
> suggesions. No flames please! You may send me private mail if you
> don't want your ideas public, else send them to the djgpp forum.
>
> DJ
- Raw text -