Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:26:26 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Wolfram Brenig <btp324 AT btp3x4 DOT phy DOT uni-bayreuth DOT de>
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: DJGPP V2 versus DJGPP V1.x
In-Reply-To: <9603051319.AA26178@btp3x4>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960306111725.25416K-100000@is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, Wolfram Brenig wrote:

> another week of jitter. Now I read that '...Existing binaries compiled 
> under DJGPP V1.x can be used for applications for which there is no v2.0 
> version....' but I don't know if using DJGPP V1.x compiled binaries under 
> DJGPP V2 will imply substantial performance tradeoff in some respect ??

v1.x programs cannot run v2.0 programs without special setup (which AFAIK
was not tested by more than one person).  You might just get yourself into
trouble (like compilation failures, mysterious death of a compiler, etc.)
if this special setup doesn't work as it is meant to.  Other than that,
there should be no performance issues here (unless you have a real
memory-tight machine).  That is, if the only thing you mean is to use v1.x
compiler and development tools to compile and link v2.0 programs.  The
above does NOT say that you can mix libraries/object files compiled with
v1.x header files and those compiled with v2.0 headers: this you CAN'T do! 

> (Additional one: there where rumors on a virus in one of the distributed
> files ... which file and what virus ??)

You have nothing to worry if you only download from SimTel mirrors.  The 
image of CWSDPMI.EXE on one of the add-on packages uploaded to OULU 
repository was found to be infected with a virus.