X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f X-Received: by 10.224.192.199 with SMTP id dr7mr16980211qab.4.1358253219534; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:33:39 -0800 (PST) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:33:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246; posting-account=p5rsXQoAAAB8KPnVlgg9E_vlm2dvVhfO NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.13.115.246 References: <50F30B39 DOT 2000507 AT iki DOT fi> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <9b907310-cf1a-4a11-b157-7e95280008c4@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Automake will drop djgpp support From: rugxulo AT gmail DOT com Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Injection-Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:33:39 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Bytes: 2587 Lines: 29 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk Hi, On Sunday, January 13, 2013 2:26:22 PM UTC-6, Georg wrote: > > Some Linux software does not just require configure/make/install > but also request the user to run Automake before that. Therefore > it would help if Automake would run with djgpp to help to port > this software to DOS. I sympathize, but most Linux software doesn't compile and work in DOS without lots of changes, even with DJGPP available. They make too many rough assumptions. I almost want to question the point of having "ISO C" exist at all when everyone only makes Linux (and/or POSIX) assumptions. :-( I still think that two of the biggest problems with projects are 1). complicated build systems, and 2). not having a clear vision of sticking to minimal requirements (e.g. lowest common standard needed instead of always bumping to latest / greatest). If it helps, the GNU Coding Standards doc does say this: "In particular, don't reject a new feature, or remove an old one, merely because a standard says it is 'forbidden' or 'deprecated'." P.S. Last night, I did a quick check, and I can count at least 25 different people having used DJGPP to maintain and release (or at least publicly patch and compile) software within roughly the last 12 months. That may not be enough to prove relevance, but at least it's something.