Comments:	Authenticated sender is <alaric+abwillms AT sdps DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
From:	"Alaric B. Williams" <alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
To:	Pedro Giffuni <pgiffuni AT fps DOT biblos DOT unal DOT edu DOT co>,
	opendos-developer AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Wed, 2 Apr 1997 18:07:08 +0000
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: The compiling tools
Reply-to:	alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
In-reply-to:	<33409900.434C@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
Message-ID:	<860000658.0520247.0@abwillms.demon.co.uk>

On 31 Mar 97 at 21:11, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

> First of all I will state that although I much prefer Caldera over
> Microsoft, I don't like what Caldera is doing:

Ah...

> 1) I cannot share OpenDOS with my friends, as it is not redistributable,
> and I cannot mirror it or have it distributed and updated with my Linux
> or FreeBSD CD. Furthermore there is no document that says that GEM can
> be distributed with DJGPP once it's ported.

Yes, my personal philosophy here is to regard the current release of OpenD=
OS 
as merely a beta. There are quite a few bugs in it; since it's
in the Ridiculous Source Control System everyone's moaning about, 
there isn't a great deal that can be done right now. Once this is
sorted, and Caldera can move their people away from writing makefiles
into fixing bugs, it might be worth reducing the licensing restrictions!

If the /current/ release gets too public, I think OpenDOS will get a
reputation for unreliability...

> 2) The nice amount of software they are licensing (CorelDraw and
> Worperfect and others) won't run unless I specifically buy Caldera=B4s
> OpenLinux. Since OpenLinux can't be ftp'd, even partially, I find it
> very disturbing in relation with the GNU spirit that has always covered
> Linux.

Hmmm, that's not too hot. Caldera people hearing this, any comment? Huh?
 
> Of course this not Delorie's fault, but assuming OpenDOS licensing will
> eventually "open", will OpenDOS be kept as a 16-bit OS, or will it run
> exclusively on the modern boxes?

At the moment, it looks like we'll be after two seperate releases (OpenDOS=
 and
OpenDOS/32). Either way, I'm petitioning for an extended API thing with al=
l the
cool features, that can be run on top of MS-DOS as well, so it will be wor=
th 
developing software for it. An OpenDOS with a snazzy LFN API will be usele=
ss
as it is, since the software won't work in any kind of DOS box. Not even u=
nder
dosemu!

> Will the idea be building it all under
> free compilers?

Yes.

ABW
--
Alaric B. Williams (alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk)

   ---<## OpenDOS FAQ ##>---
Plain HTML: http://www.delorie.com/opendos/faq/

- Raw text -