Message-ID:	<002901b9fc58$25d90320$6df8c6c3@johans-dator>
From:	"Johan Henriksson" <johan DOT he AT telia DOT com>
To:	<djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: DJGPP: the future is... ?
Date:	Mon, 27 Mar 1995 17:33:23 +0200
MIME-Version:	1.0
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 <ajschrotenboer AT lycosmail DOT com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com <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
>
>

- Raw text -