Mail Archives: djgpp/2008/11/08/23:03:39
> For this must be archived for all times! It's a document of time
> what you've just said!
Er, the whole mailing list is archived and has been since 1992.
> A sort of "I work hard for the tiny group that loves my tools
> because they love ancient hardware as I do" kind of point of view.
My "attitude" is very practical. DJGPP is a dos compiler, it has
fundamental limits due to that fact, and there's nothing we can do
about it (well, besides what we've already done to work around them).
What you're asking for is for DJGPP to become something different than
what it is - and something that other ports of gcc, like MinGW,
already are.
> Holy ghost, this is such BOG-STABLE software!! And perfectly
> programmed too!
So is Linux. But to take the dependence on DOS (and thus limitations
imposed by DOS) out, you'd have to take out the core of DJGPP itself -
the C library that provides the layer over DOS. Take that out,
there's nothing else left but the GNU packages, and you can get those
for any OS.
> But it should obey to the rules of modern times someday instead of
> staying a sort of "relic" of computer history for all times!
Then it wouldn't be DJGPP any more. DJGPP is a port of the GNU tools
to DOS. If you want GNU tools for Windows, use MinGW. If you want
GNU tools for Linux, use Fedora (or any other linux/unix distro). The
whole point of DJGPP is the fact that it's a DOS tool, not that it's
GNU tools - there are plenty of other ways to use the GNU tools if you
don't like DJGPP's reliance on DOS.
> Sure, it's your software, and if you say "it can", it can.
Yet it's free software, so if you want to do something else with it,
go right ahead. However, if you change it to be what you want, it
won't be DJGPP any more. It will be something different.
> However, keeping this attitude without reacting to criticism and only
> shouting around ...
>
> > Not at all. DJGPP is a *dos* compiler. NOT A WINDOWS COMPILER. NOT
> > A UNIX COMPILER. IT'S A DOS COMPILER.
>
> ... would be very wrong-headed then, IMHO.
What you're offering isn't criticism, it's a pie-in-the-sky desire for
DJGPP to be something it's not, without seeing that what you want
already exists outside of DJGPP (or in djgpp, if you take the time to
learn about the workarounds we already provide). I "shout" because
you aren't listening, and the point I'm making is important. DJGPP is
a DOS tool. That's it's purpose - to bring GNU tools to DOS. If you
want GNU tools for non-dos systems, don't use DJGPP. It's the wrong
tool for the job. Use GNU tools for those other systems instead.
They're the right tools for those jobs.
Granted, we've provided some ways to get around limitations like
command line length (by using bash and shell scripts, or @file, or
.../*) and process size (by using virtual memory throught DPMI), but
it will always expect DOS to be beneath it all, and you'll always have
DOS's fundamental limits as your starting point.
- Raw text -