From:	Damon Hogan <damonh AT pgmincorporated DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: NT and DJGPP
Date:	Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:36:56 -0700
Organization:	XMission http://www.xmission.com/
Lines:	23
Message-ID:	<38617CB8.AA12A862@pgmincorporated.com>
References:	<385850A6 DOT 4A084966 AT home DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	mail.pgmincorporated.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	news.xmission.com 945913027 19346 166.70.119.101 (23 Dec 1999 01:37:07 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT xmission DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date:	23 Dec 1999 01:37:07 GMT
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

I compile some stuff on 98/95/NT and Linux of course.  I agree that the lack
of
long filenames is troublesome in that on one particular note you cannot name
libraries
the same so that every thing compiles the same i.e. portable code which I
though was the intent of djgpp in the first place.  However I live with that
fact because I
did need some way to develop C++ code that was portable on many platforms
including Linux/98/NT.  As far as moving to CYGNUS.  I Have CYGWIN32 but
I am not happy about the runtime file requirements.   So for my CYNUS is not
the
answer.

"Edward F. Sowell" wrote:

> The lack of long file name support  for DJGPP continues to bother me.
> Apparently, the
> efforts to fix it have not gotten far. Tell me, what are the NT users of
> DJGPP doing
> to work around this? Going to Cygnus?
>
> Ed Sowell

- Raw text -