X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne AT zxdehrnyya DOT cam>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: About different programming language support for DJGPP port of
	GCC
Date:	Sat, 30 Jul 2016 19:00:39 -0400
Organization:	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines:	53
Message-ID:	<20160730190039.55fb9531@_>
References:	<761aff8d-eb27-fcae-5486-28fdf878d2fd AT iki DOT fi>
	<dc5085ec-7a16-4a97-bd28-0eded3afcd63 AT googlegroups DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	n4wpt9zq8xR26Ttf9mo2BA.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT aioe DOT org
X-Newsreader:	Claws Mail 3.13.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
X-Notice:	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Bytes:	3550
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On Sat, 30 Jul 2016 11:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
rugxulo AT gmail DOT com wrote:

> > how many people are actually using DJGPP
> > port of Ada compiler?  
> 
> I hate arguments like this. It's a self-defeating question, setting up
> an impossible impasse.
> 
> Is this really adding much to the maintenance burden? I doubt it, esp.
> considering the overall complexity of Ada2012 and modern OSes.

This is just my two cents, as I find that I tend to view things
somewhat differently from other people.

The Ada compiler and most of the DJGPP utilities are licensed under
GPL, yes?  So, for these programs, it's not necessary to have a GPL
free C library to link to, like DJGPP's C library for DOS.  These
programs could use a port of GLIBC for DOS, if such a port was
available for DOS.  One might be able to construct one by filling in OS
calls with DJGPP C library code or even calls to the DJGPP C library.
Having a working GLIBC for DOS would allow most of these apps to
compile as-is without any porting.  I'm sure there are probably some
technical issues that have to be worked through so the apps also
execute correctly.  People using DJGPP to compile DOS apps could still
use DJGPP's C library for DOS apps, while the utilities would be
compiled with a proper GLIBC.  So, I think that if DJGPP still has
any goals that the goal for DJGPP should be to port the GLIBC library
to DOS.  Apparently, there is no new DOS OS coming so far which might
revive DJGPP, the people supporting the DJGPP project are waning or
moving on, and the users of DJGPP are moving on.  Seven years ago a new
DOS OS would've revived DJGPP.  A DJGPP based OS might still have
use for a few people.  However, today, I think DJGPP's only hope is to
support GNU utilities for DOS or NTVDM console, which would be best
served with a correctly functioning DOS port of GLIBC.

Of course, if almost no one is using DJGPP anymore or DOS anymore, then
what's the point?  It could take decades to build up to full momentum,
like Linux.  I only see a handful of guys posting to comp.os.msdos.djgpp
anymore. There are almost no posts to comp.os.msdos.programmer.  There
are just a few recent posts to Robert Riebisch's "DOS Ain't Dead" and
only a couple news updates on www.freedos.org for this year.  KernelEx
comments on various pages died between 2012 and 2015 so Windows 98/SE
usage has died.  Japheth's website with HXRT and other DOS utilities
went offline.  Daniel Borca's DJELF website went offline and was
archived by DJGPP.  Many of the old DOS archives seem to be slowly
dying.

It's just some "food" for thought ...


Rod Pemberton

- Raw text -