From: Nigel Stephens Date: Thu, 8 Dec 1994 15:09:48 GMT To: Charles Sandmann Cc: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu, elf AT netcom DOT com, mat AT ardi DOT com Subject: Re: object file format change? References: <199412081452 DOT IAA01417 AT new-orleans DOT NeoSoft DOT com> <6838 DOT 199412081332 AT westminster DOT algor DOT co DOT uk> Charles Sandmann (sandmann AT new-orleans DOT NeoSoft DOT com) writes: > > cross-compiler using --target=i386-go32. Linux is a red herring: > > there all sorts of different Unix systems (e.g. FreeBSD) with > > different native object code formats, why should we choose to be > > "compatible" with Linux only? > > A very good point. So far, the best argument I have heard is the > superior functionality (C++ debugging, overlinking, etc). Yeah, I like ELF too (with STABS for C++ debugging, instead of DWARF). But of course my point was made so as to lead on to... > > And when Windoze95/Chicago eventually arrives, how much longer will > > vanilla MSDOS survive: Chicago runs 32-bit NT/COFF executables too. > > DJGPP apps still run in Win 95 DOS windows, actually much faster than > NT/COFF images do. DJGPP is still the best for text apps. What is > obvious to me is that in a few years non-DPMI systems will be rare. > Enhancing our djgpp libc to be long file name aware under Win95 is > possible (I have some working prototypes). But that sounds better. If we could also add some functions to emulate fork(), pipe() and other such Unix primitives over Win 95 then this would be just fine! > People are also working on GCC for NT; this may turn out to be the entire > Win 95 solution or provide a lot of the code necessary to turn it on. By this I assume that you mean GCC for NT graphical/windowing applications? Nigel -- _________________________________________________________________________ Nigel Stephens, Algorithmics Ltd, 3 Drayton Park, London, N5 1NU, England phone: +44 171 700 3301 fax: +44 171 700 3400 email: nigel AT algor DOT co DOT uk