Mail Archives: djgpp/2008/11/08/16:30:53
Hi,
On Nov 8, 7:40 am, "Andreas Eibach" <aeib DOT DOT DOT AT mail DOT com> wrote:
>
> > > This old thread from 2006:
> > [...]
> > > finally brought some insight that djgpp uses a 16-bit stub that will
> make
> > > any 32bit program _look_ like a 16 bit app for MSDOS.
>
> > True.
>
> Very true, and just an insanity for 2008.
Windows NT-based OSes are popular for DOS users for only one reason:
stability. They greatly increase the footprint, and they suck a lot
more at compatibility. Seems silly, esp. since things like Vista are
actually freakin' worse for DOS than XP. And then there's good ol'
x86-64, which kills V86 mode .... Wouldn't be a big deal if emulation
wasn't so damn slow.
> > > Is there - after 2 years - still no way to circumvent this (compiling
> > > options?) apart from silly workarounds I already read about in the
> thread
> > > from 2 years ago?
>
> > You could try Daniel Borca's DJELF. It's a version of DJGPP which
> produces
> > ELF executables. [...]
> >http://www.geocities.com/dborca/djgpp/elf/djelf.html
>
> Thanks again, I will also take a look there.
I wouldn't necessarily recommend that unless you need those features.
It's not exactly supported, and you're stuck to only one version of
GCC. I don't think you'll find much help for it, if any (since the
author is pretty much MIA).
> > If DJGPP implemented it's 16-bit
> > DPMI startup stub as an DPMI executable loader as a DOS application or as
> a
> > int 0x21 TSR 'exec' function extension, you'd be set.
>
> I guess so. And that *MUST* happen someday, otherwise DJGPP will - see other
> post - be merely an application for some old-time hardware enthusiasts.
I'll admit, DJGPP isn't as active as it once was, but considering how
much more robust it is now compared to a few years ago, it's very hard
(impossible?) to complain. These guys (DJ, CWS, Juan, Eli) have kicked
some serious butt in their efforts. As cliche as it is, I think we
really need to place blame with MS for their broken DOS compatibility.
(I don't know why DOS is such a four-letter word to some people.)
> > Yes, it's possible. I'd like to see DJGPP produce pure 32-bit
> applications:
> > multi-boot protocol (either ELF or a.out "kludge") and unstubbed DPMI with
> a
> > separate loader.
>
> You bet me too! Again, it is 2008, not 1995 anymore!
> Since it will be simply silly to try hard at all costs to comply with, say,
> MSDOS 6.22 in 2010.
In case you haven't noticed, most DOS diehards use MS-DOS 7.10 or
FreeDOS instead. And there is a fairly noticeable difference vs. oldy-
moldy 6.22. But it doesn't hurt to support MS-DOS 6.22 also. Anyways,
6.22 never supported LFNs or FAT32, so obviously DJGPP extends beyond
that.
> If it's old-fashioned like stovepipe hats, they need to blow a fresh breeze
> into the old cruft, period. Otherwise people will switch to another software
> (MingW then) but alas, this can also initiate a process of renewal.
MinGW isn't necessarily better, just different. Same with Cygwin. And
don't forget OpenWatcom. All have their uses, just some have better
support in some areas. It depends on what OS, what DLLs, what
licenses, what APIs, what speed, etc. you need.
And it's not like DOS isn't developed anymore (although FreeDOS-32 did
pretty much stall indefinitely ...), just people are busy with other
things.
> > Well, the only suggestion I have is to use the full exact path...
>
> Thanks, but I have multiple options, say ...
> tool.exe -f <path+filename> -l <log filename> -v (verbose) etc.
> This whole thing is called via a subroutine in the .BAT.
>
> Note too that tool.exe is running from a *fixed* directory, but the batch
> file (doing lots of for /f ... token | delim magic) is CD'ing into each
> directory to do its operation there. And once the current path exceeds the
> aforementioned 64 bytes, the error message from the subject is spit out.
You know that all DJGPP apps by default allow ".../*.c" for recursion,
right?
> No. I'll be sincere: I'll use MingW for now.
> BUT: since I'm a long time DJGPP user (and only recently need directory
> recursion supporting VERY long paths) I will come back to it once the winds
> of
> modernism will have blown a sharp gust into it :) (Bout time, dammit! :P)
DJGPP is plenty modern, but there's always room for improvement. Of
course, the mantra you'll typically hear is this: "Code it yourself or
use GNU/Linux." :-(
- Raw text -