Message-ID: <002901b9fc58$25d90320$6df8c6c3@johans-dator> From: "Johan Henriksson" To: Subject: Re: DJGPP: the future is... ? Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 17:33:23 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com from Johan Henriksson, Sweden HTTP://come.to/jhewok | Primary mail: johan DOT he AT telia DOT com #UIN 12035895 Second: jhe75 AT hotmail DOT com Third: johan_he AT yahoo DOT com Leadprogrammer and FX-specialist at Real software http://come.to/real_software ************************************************************************* -----Original Message----- From: Adam Schrotenboer To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Date: Saturday, March 27, 1999 3:01 AM Subject: Re: DJGPP: the future is... ? >If I may add my $.02, I would like to see further development/maintenance >of RSX. As I understand, it's still back in the days of GCC 2.7.x.x, and >now we have EGCS, PGCC, and the standby GCC 2.8.1. > >Is anybody maintaining the pkg anymore??? If I honestly thought I could >help, I would, but I doubt that I have skill or time to do so, even though >I do want to. > >I do agree that DJGPP should not become a port to Win32, though I do >believe that we need more support for it. Cygwin, though it may be GPL or >Pseudo GPL, is still not free, and the backing is hardly there. I would >guess that if somebody really wants commercial Win32 they'll go VC++ >(Which I personally think is a bastardization of C++. It's not >cross-platform, it's M$ proprietary, and costs a fortune. The compiler may >be decent, but the Visual part I have a problem with). Anyway, I would >like to see better support for Win32, partly because DOS will become a lot >harder to get to in newer versions of Windows. yes, let's make DJGPP something that works well under Windows so we can throw out MSVC from our disks (When I install it again :). >Personally, I intend to >start using Linux, and drop Windows as soon as it is practical. Until >then, I'll probably run a dual-boot. > >Yes, I admit that all this is just my opinion, and I am probably wrong one >a point or two, and if I have offended anyone, my apologies. > >DJ Delorie wrote: > >> Don't panic! >> >> I've been doing some thinking lately about where DJGPP is going. I've >> concluded to myself that it really isn't *going* anywhere, it's >> *there*. The core code is pretty stable and feature-full. GNU ports >> come out often enough, and we're becoming "just another unix platform" >> for a lot of people. The web pages have pretty much everything I can >> think to add to them (although we can always use more documentation :) >> The big focus these days is on third-party additions (like Allegro) >> and applications. >> >> Cool. >> I have an idéa that I have been thinking of. Why not add a lot of unstandard useful new C-commands into DJGPP? I know you might prefer clean ANSI but a lot of fun stuff could be added and would make more ppl use DJGPP. I could even help when I get time... >> The big question I have for you all is this: What's next? >> >> I don't mean "Let's write application XYZ", I mean for the DJGPP >> project itself. Think BIG. I don't see too many people installing >> DOS these days, and Cygwin is shaping up to be almost as good as DJGPP >> (hey, I can boast - I'm on both teams) so the Win32 systems will see >> less demand for DJGPP over time (I expect, at least). Plus, a lot of >> DJGPP users are switching to Linux or WinNT/Cygwin. >> >> So what are our choices? >> >> Well, we can try to saturate the DOS market. I don't know how to do >> that, unless we spend a fortune on ads in PC magazines :-( Perhaps an >> effort to "spread the word" in other forums (nicely, please) would >> "enlighten the uninformed", but it's for diminishing returns. >> >> We could try to make DJGPP a Windows-native system. I don't think >> this is a good idea because 90% of the value in DJGPP is the way it >> hides DOS, and we'd have to throw it all away and start from scratch >> if we switched to the Win32 API. Plus, Cygwin already does Win32, and >> legally I can't promote such a project because that's what I already >> do for Cygnus. If you like this option, join the cygwin team - you'll >> be much happier, and we can always use more help. >> >> For the same reason, DJGPP for Linux is a bad idea. Heck, DJGPP is a >> port of the Linux tools themselves! >> >> We could overhaul DJGPP again for ELF support and a few other >> fundamental design changes, but why mess with a good thing? Sure, >> we've got a list of bugs to fix (like C++ templates in COFF) but >> they'll get fixed eventually. Such redesigns would have little real >> effect on the project. >> >> So, I'm at a loss as to where we should be focusing our energy at this >> time. Mailing list traffic doubled every year from 1993 to 1997, but >> *dropped* 10% in 1998 (1999 isn't looking too good, either), and >> delorie.com's web server has had a pretty steady load for the last two >> years, even though I've got plenty of spare resources. I think our >> period of growth is over unless we start something new, but what? >> >> So my task for you, my loyal fans, devoted followers, silent lurkers, >> and the occasional tax collector (hiss!) is to help shape the future! >> Let's get those ideas flowing and figure out what the Next Big Thing >> for us will be! >> >> Considerations (but not limitations): >> >> * GPL. We've come a long way with it, no reason to change now. >> >> * Should give something to the community. DJGPP was built by the >> community, the benefits should go to the community. >> >> * Traffic to my web server means money for us, which I turn into more >> servers, bigger disks, faster net connections, time to write CGIs, >> etc. The main DJGPP server is a P166 with 27Gb of disk and a 1Mb/s >> link, but if you folks want to chip in for a PII/450 I'll get one >> ;-) Current traffic just about covers ISP, electric bills, and >> upkeep (about $9,000/year). >> >> * Should be long term and highly visible, so we'll all get rich and >> famous (we hope) through contracts and such. >> >> * Should be something that can grow on its own. For example, if >> personal labor is involved (like consulting), you're limited by how >> much you can do, but a web page, computer program, or software >> package can grow and multiply without needing more people-hours. >> This also frees us up to do other projects when we're done :-) >> >> So crank up those brains, think carefully, and let's hear your >> suggesions. No flames please! You may send me private mail if you >> don't want your ideas public, else send them to the djgpp forum. >> >> DJ > >