To:	ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru
Cc:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
References:	<AAZET5qaV7 AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru>
Message-Id:	<ABHRa5qe7D@belous.munic.msk.su>
From:	"Arkady V.Belousov" <ark AT belous DOT munic DOT msk DOT su>
Date:	Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:05:53 +0400 (MSD)
Organization:	Locus
Reply-To:	ark AT mos DOT ru
Subject:	Re: ClosedDOS???
Lines:	31
MIME-Version:	1.0

X-Comment-To: -= ArkanoiD =-

Hi!

10-σΕΞ-97 01:54 ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru (-= ArkanoiD =-) wrote to ark AT belous DOT munic DOT msk DOT su:

 > >  > > Drop it away. Completely or nearly so. Use GNU utilities set instead ;).
 > >  > > It does look more like _Open_DOS, right?
 > >      GNU not have compiler for DOS platform without DOS extender.
 > There is no compiler in OpenDOS package anyways.

     But they compile their kernel and utilities by "normal" compilers,
which not require complex hard for target code (like many memory or fast
CPUs).

 > And what's wrong with DOS extender if it is free?

     You think - this is wise? DOS utilities and kernel itself with external
DOS extender? Only for 386+? How many memory additionaly this requires? How
many time to initialize this requires? How many stability and compatability
this add?

 > btw GNU utilities could be compiled with non-GNU
 > compiler if you need pure 16-bit code.

     Great. :(

 > BTW i always wonder *why* there is no GNU compiler for 16-bit DOS..

     Some think, this because no one (!), capable to port gcc, interesting
by this. :(

- Raw text -