X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Received:	by 10.224.192.199 with SMTP id dr7mr16980211qab.4.1358253219534;
	Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:33:39 -0800 (PST)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Date:	Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:33:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:	<cf25d570-447e-43eb-b045-05979c8d05dc@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To:	groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info:	glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246;
	posting-account=p5rsXQoAAAB8KPnVlgg9E_vlm2dvVhfO
NNTP-Posting-Host:	65.13.115.246
References:	<acd1cb79-72ff-48f5-8c92-6cf803b9f121 AT googlegroups DOT com>
	<50F30B39 DOT 2000507 AT iki DOT fi> <cf25d570-447e-43eb-b045-05979c8d05dc AT googlegroups DOT com>
User-Agent:	G2/1.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
Message-ID:	<9b907310-cf1a-4a11-b157-7e95280008c4@googlegroups.com>
Subject:	Re: Automake will drop djgpp support
From:	rugxulo AT gmail DOT com
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Injection-Date:	Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:33:39 +0000
Bytes:	2587
Lines:	29
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

Hi,

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 2:26:22 PM UTC-6, Georg wrote:
>
> Some Linux software does not just require configure/make/install
> but also request the user to run Automake before that. Therefore
> it would help if Automake would run with djgpp to help to port
> this software to DOS.

I sympathize, but most Linux software doesn't compile and work in
DOS without lots of changes, even with DJGPP available. They make
too many rough assumptions. I almost want to question the point of
having "ISO C" exist at all when everyone only makes Linux (and/or
POSIX) assumptions.  :-(

I still think that two of the biggest problems with projects are
1). complicated build systems, and 2). not having a clear vision of
sticking to minimal requirements (e.g. lowest common standard needed
instead of always bumping to latest / greatest).

If it helps, the GNU Coding Standards doc does say this:

"In particular, don't reject a new feature, or remove an old one,
merely because a standard says it is 'forbidden' or 'deprecated'."

P.S. Last night, I did a quick check, and I can count at least 25
different people having used DJGPP to maintain and release (or at
least publicly patch and compile) software within roughly the last
12 months. That may not be enough to prove relevance, but at least
it's something.

- Raw text -