Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/04/08/22:22:21
At 01:58 AM 4/9/99 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>It seems that much of the incentive behind the development of DJGPP was
>>due directly to the inadequacies of DOS that you are ranting about.
>>Wouldn't changing that underlying DOS `engine' in the ways you suggest
>>just amout to reinventing DJGPP in the image of Linux? Why not just
>>move to Linux, then, and abandon DOS and DJGPP?
>>
>
>>From my perspective - I am happy using DOS and djgpp and Linux too. I would
>think that it would be a real shame to lose djgpp, just because the
>underlying OS is systematically destroyed. There is a wealth of other good
>software/applications/games which is going to become unusable because MS are
>engineering the OS so people are not going to be able to use the old stuff.
>I personallity don't have the large quantities of money to purchase
>expensive unreliable software, when a better system exists with the source
>code, and is written using the GNU philosophy. Organisations such as schools
>and computing in developing nations are dependant on good software like
>djgpp and Linux to allow them to educate people to use computers, and I
>would like to keep that avenue open for them..Some people may not want to
>use Linux because they will lose the investment they have in made buying
>software for DOS/Win95. This is one segment of end-user who will lose out in
>the end if their existing OS is not supported.
>
>I think that if djgpp is to survive we are going to need a DOS-based OS to
>keep us going, with sources. FreeDOS is 16-bit and although closer to the
>original DOS, is not the best system that we *could* have (for 386 and above
>systems). If we are going to have to build a free software DOS which runs
>all existing software, the I would like it to be the best version possible.
>Make it POSIX compliant. Make it 32 bit. Build all of the useful stuff in at
>a low level, so that everything running on the OS has access to all the
>devices. Build an optional windowing system as a enhancement to run windows
>programmes, rather than the only way to get things done as in Win NT. Add
>Xfree and Gnome if people feel they need it. Make DOS configurable for
>individual users requirements.
>
>Providing that the system runs all people's current software, is reliable
>and is supported, then people will stick with it.
>
>>There are many of us who just want to do away completely with M$
>>software. DJGPP can take you all the way there *except* for the kernel,
>>and can do it with fewer system resources than can a full-blown Linux
>>distribution, and it lets you keep your DOS machine. Very neat.
>>
>>Yes, there is lots of room for improvement in DOS. These improvements
>>could be made to enhance the cooperation of DOS and DJGPP and to
>>provide some of the capabilities you mention, but DJGPP won't be of
>>much use without DOS of some kind. It doesn't *have* to be FreeDOS,
>>but the advantage of the FreeDOS project is that their kernel is
>>maturing rapidly, and it might deserve consideration as a starting
>>point for building a better DOS that will still support DJGPP.
>
>
>I agree with this. I think that if a djgpp DOS is to exist, it would be
>silly not to take advantage of the existing code available and save
>ourselves some work. Any enhanced DOS system does not need to be as
>complicated as Linux (although there are some useful features which could be
>added as extras such as virtual terminals) and can retain the same basic
>functionality, but with the retro-fitted features of the original built as
>standard..
>
>Do people care enough about djgpp to ensure its survival by engineering a OS
>to run it? Is this thread leading nowhere? I'd be interested in seeing
>whether people see this as the way forward...or any other ideas they have..
>
>---
>Arron Shutt
>version8 AT ashutt DOT demon DOT co DOT uk -- www.ashutt.demon.co.uk
>"You can jump all you like but it's the day of the cow" - Mike Keneally
Bravo!, Arron. I fully agree, and would stress that those who also want
the multi-user/multi-tasking which Linux provides will still have their
old friend DOS in some form and their good DOS program library plus
DJGPP. No contradiction in this philosophy.
HOWEVER, some of us will have to have an MS-approved machine in the
house to run those programs some members of the family want. That
means (gasp) having to have the latest MS Windows--whatever that
might be. But that's no fault of DOS, DJGPP, or Linux--they will
remain good as gold IMHO.
Ralph Proctor
Still waiting for the underlying window.
- Raw text -