X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Tue, 08 Feb 2011 22:20:02 +0200
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT gnu DOT org>
Subject:	Re: VIRTUAL BOX and my GAME - Mr Rod Pemberton
In-reply-to:	<iirko2$rtk$1@speranza.aioe.org>
X-012-Sender:	halo1 AT inter DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-id:	<83mxm6s2h9.fsf@gnu.org>
References:	<125997 DOT 8962 DOT qm AT web45113 DOT mail DOT sp1 DOT yahoo DOT com> <iipaa4$nu1$1 AT speranza DOT aioe DOT org> <xnfwrzpw1i DOT fsf AT delorie DOT com> <iirko2$rtk$1 AT speranza DOT aioe DOT org>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have AT notreplytome DOT cmm>
> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 09:45:25 -0500
> Bytes: 3360
> 
> For all practical purposes, DJGPP is dead.  It's frozen in time.  It
> tried to move to XP, sort of...  It hasn't, yet...  That's still in
> Beta.  7 years of Beta...

I don't know what you are talking about.  DJGPP v2.03 works very well
on XP, and is rock solid there.  I'm using it for the last 7 years to
maintain the DJGPP port of Emacs.  There's no need whatsoever to go to
the beta-quality v2.04 (which, I hear, is also much more stable than
some release-quality packages out there).

> I've repeatedly suggested two things that could
> breathe some life into DJGPP: GNU GLIBC, and recompiled v2.03 with 64-bit
> support enabled.  GLIBC would allow GNU tools on DOS to just work.

GNU tools seem to have no problem working with the library we have.
Volunteers are welcome to port glibc, of course, but I see no reason
that it will "breathe some life" into DJGPP.  glibc is just a library.

> 64-bit would allow current users to migrate from 32-bit.  They'll
> have to do so at some point.  I.e., you'll lose them.  So, the void
> is/was being filled by other compilers: Cygwin, Pelles C, LCC-Win32,
> LLVM, MinGW, etc.  All the recent x86 OS developers seem to be using
> Linux w/GNU GCC, or MASM.

And of course, none of this is relevant to the issue at hand.

- Raw text -