Mail Archives: djgpp/2012/04/26/20:00:15
Hi,
On Apr 26, 3:26 am, Eli Zaretskii <e DOT DOT DOT AT gnu DOT org> wrote:
> > From: Rugxulo <rugx DOT DOT DOT AT gmail DOT com>
> > Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > > And I didn't (and don't) have time to work on fixing that.
> > > But if someone gets that to work, I will happily switch, because COFF
> > > debug info is barely supported in latest versions of GCC and GDB.
>
> > I know this is a dumb question, but have you tried nagging the GCC or
> > Cygwin people for help? Esp. for PE/COFF, what do they do for unexec?
>
> The native Windows build of Emacs uses a separate file, unexw32.c.
> Cygwin uses yet another file, unexcw.c.
If it were me, I'd ask the Windows dudes to help us, but I don't know
if they're sympathetic (and I heavily doubt it).
> > But you still (exclusively?) use an older GCC for your work anyways,
> > right? 3.4.x?
>
> Yes. "If it ain't broken, don't fix it."
Agreed.
> > So I guess that will do for now.
>
> "For now", yes. I'm under a lot of pressure from various Emacs
> contributors to drop the DJGPP support. They question the size of the
> user community that would like the DJGPP build to continue to exist.
Who cares about marketshare? If that were the only factor, nobody
would use Linux instead of Windows. But it is true that DOS is heavily
in decline, and I only use it as a hobby "for fun".
> With each new version of GCC, Binutils, GDB, or Make that move farther
> away of supporting the DJGPP environment, I have less and less reasons
> to continue fighting back. Expect me to give up some time soon.
Since you're the one sweating blood for it, doing all the work, it's
totally your call. I'm grateful you kept it up this long, so I don't
expect any miracles.
However, from a quick search, it seems the big problem to them is 8.3
filenames. I know you probably wouldn't like the idea, but I'd rather
rely on DOSLFN (or, if hating VFAT, StarLFN) instead of dropping the
port entirely.
And BTW, it sounds dumb for them to say, "certainly nobody using MS-
DOS is using recent software". Since when was that the only DOS? (PC-
DOS, ROM-DOS, DR-DOS, PTS-DOS) Not to mention FreeDOS 1.1, which just
came out a few months ago. If it were me, I'd tell them to stop saying
"MS-DOS" [sic] and just use generic "DOS" or "FreeDOS" (since GPL'd)
if they really want to promote free software.
> > Sorry I can't help further, it's all Greek to me.
>
> To me too, unfortunately. If someone who knows their way around
> sections, debug info, and Binutils in general can have a look at
> unexcoff.c and suggest what to do there to get a runnable, debuggable
> emacs.exe after dumping, I'd be grateful.
Dunno, I guess I could take a look, but I'm always confused by all
that gobbledegook.
- Raw text -