Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:37:01 +0300 (IDT) From: Eli Zaretskii To: Wojciech Galazka cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: DJGPP wish list In-Reply-To: <3354BA6B.7FAA@chem.uw.edu.pl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Wojciech Galazka wrote: > 2) Closer comatibility with Unix > for example in DJGPP is broken Please explain this in more detail. First, what exactly do you think is broken in ? And second, what other example of incompatibilities with Unix did you find? (If there are no other examples, then why say ``for example''?) > 3) ioctl support for terminals This exists, but is unfinished. Please see the header. The Unix-compatible stuff there is ifdef'ed away because the underlying functionality is unimplemented. (Some Unix-born programs test at compile time for definitions of symbols such as TIOCGSIZE and if it is defined, decide that ioctl functionality works, which then produces a broken program if you compile it with DJGPP. So it is safer to not define these until the functionality is in place.) It should be quite easy to implement the ioctl functions by using the DJGPP filesystem extensions mechanism. Examples of supporting some ioctl functions in this way can be found in the DJGPP ports of GNU Fileutils (v2gnu/fil313s.zip, file ls-msdos.c) and Ispell (v2gnu/isp3120s.zip, file djterm.c), which see. Somebody with enough motivation (you?) should sit down and add the minimal support for ioctl. Experience shows that nothing in DJGPP gets done without a motivated individual who is ready to invest the necessary effort. > 4) better support for shell programming Please elaborate. IMHO, the DJGPP support of Unix-like shells and their features is much better than you could expect on MSDOS. Please explain in more detail what do you miss here.