From: pjfarley AT banet DOT net (Peter J. Farley III) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: netbd.h, sockets.h, in.h and types.h don't work Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 01:22:14 GMT Message-ID: <3936feb4.2522956@news3.banet.net> References: <3936DA62 DOT 9581F9CE AT bigfoot DOT com> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243 NNTP-Posting-Host: 32.100.77.96 X-Trace: 2 Jun 2000 01:20:24 GMT, 32.100.77.96 Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services Lines: 76 X-Complaints-To: abuse AT prserv DOT net To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Richard Dawe wrote: >Hello. >Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Sorry, I cannot parse this. Don't you agree that the development >> environment will become larger? And what's Microsoft got to do with >> this? > >I think we need to define the term "integration" here. AFAICT Eli and me >think that you mean integration into djdev itself, whereas you are >thinking about integration between two separate entities: djdev + library. >The puzzling thing is that the second case is what we have today anyway - >most of the network libraries do integrate with DJGPP, otherwise how would >they work? PMFJI here fellas, but there *are* open-source application packages out there that also assume networking libraries and headers are installed and work in the environment in which you are compiling, not just trn/pine/lynx/etc. porters. I ran into this myself recently with an open-source FSM (finite state machine) application generator called libero . I, too, got the "ntohl redefined" error (among others), and thus discovered this problem myself. May I make the suggestion that networking headers should not even be present in djdev if there is no library support for them? I believe it would be cleaner for a developer/porter to see that an include file is missing rather than getting redefined variables or macros. At least then the developer knows that (an)other component(s) is/are needed and can go looking for it/them. Unless, of course, there are parts of the library that can't live without those headers. Is the latter currently true? IMHO, separate libraries (i.e., djdev + library/headers) that integrate seamlessly with the DJGPP environment are just fine, and I know folk like Rich Dawe and others are working very hard to make that a reality. But it really would be finer if the zip-picker asked if you wanted DOS networking capabilities, and gave you the appropriate networking zips as well as the basic development zips, and if the networking zips you downloaded worked just like all of the other fine ports which with we have been gifted by the DJGPP workers. For those new to the networking libraries/headers, it would be nice to see a short FAQ somewhere on what libraries are needed for what networking application areas (i.e., do I need libnet AND WAT-TCP AND libsocket, or just two of them, or just one? How do I choose? Are there incompatibilities? In what order should they be installed? Etc.) Of course, it would also be finer if application package developers didn't incidentally *assume* so much, and allowed for environments that don't actually support networking. <*Sigh*> One more IMHO: If that dosppp06.zip file mentioned earlier in this thread supports a dialup ppp connection under DOS, that makes it another good candidate for the zip picker. I strongly suspect that 90% of those who might need networking DJGPP support are dial-up networkers, despite the increasing availability of DSL and cable-modem alternatives, at least in the USA. I, for one, do not have DSL or cable-modem as options, *despite* living in a *very* large US city. "Wide pipe" marketers don't target residential neighborhoods because the support costs outweigh the price point at which they can sell the service, so they go primarily for the "high-density" areas, leaving low-density residential areas as the very last to get access. And wireless alternatives are slower and substantially less reliable than either DSL or cable-modem. Bah! Humbug! A pox on all their houses! ---------------------------------------------------- Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT nospam DOT dorsai DOT org OR pjfarley AT nospam DOT banet DOT net)