Subj : GCC variations
To : Bob Jones
From : Mike Luther
Date : Sat Sep 13 2003 10:20 pm
From the VOICE maillist robot tonight comes a blurb on Innotek noting that it
has released Beta2 of GCC for OS/2. Scrolling down through this and that in
the Innotek Support Forum comes at least one pointer toward what IBM is doing
for compiler tools for OS/2 in that VAC++ for OS/2 isn't supported no more.
Well .. there reportedly is a fix for yet some more that Mike Kaply has gotten
done one way or another for VAC++ in forcing forward IWB for OS/2 and the MOZ
1.4.1 variation on the theme for OS/2. I'm pretty sure I have that fix here
for my VAC++ for whatever.
But the curious point was exactly how the MOZ 1.5.# variation on the theme was
being worked in relation to compilers. OK, from the Innotek forum and the
threads on GCC 3.2.2 there three things pop out.
1.) Mike Kaply is using 3.2.2 in cooperation with Innotek to
produce MOZ 1.5.# for OS/2.
2.) The variation on the theme of GCC 3.2.2 from Innotek does *NOT*
use an EMX toolset, as I read this! Yet, in the lib0#.zip section
on the GCC 3.2.2 deal, there is now a libc03.zip variation there
too and it has to be there for use with MOZ 1.5.#. Or at least
SOME version of libc has to be there, at least for what is inside
that archive ...
3.) In the comments on Virtual PC, which has recent new text in it
about VPC, there is now comment that since Microsoft now owns
dis and dat .. the intent is to run OS/2 on WIN platforms,
not the other way around, which is causing commotion since it
appears to have been conveniently dropped .. after MS got all
this.
But one sentence has an interesting date in it. They speak of
"Sunset for OS/2 in 2006.."
Tell you what! Three years is a *LONG* time in the saga of my operating dog is
bigger than your dog? A lot of water can wash whatever of a tree side between
now and than, right? Chuckle.
Now obviously all this and that talk and banter about whatever has been going
on for a LONG time now about Death for OS/2 .. but this is the first widely
public remark about a new date of 2006 .. which is two more years beyond 4Q
2004 twas being bandied about for dis and dat .. which was widely circulated
at Warpstock 2002 and elsewhere publicized. Yet here we are again with an
admitted M/S oriented couple of words for 2006 now ...
The core issue around any operating system, in my personal opinion, which
heralds the practical presence of it, is the appearance of the first good
easily used compiler for it.
The real staying power of an established operating system is the continued
presence of an easily used and useful compiler for it, plus the continued
availability of new device drivers which can interface the operating system on
new hardware that appears.
Now that IBM is obviously getting out of the compiler business as I think we
know it today, not only for OS/2, but sort of for a lot of other things,does
that mean that the appearance of CGG 3.2.2 here via Innotek is IBM's actual
answer for what to do to support OS/2 into 2006 as noted? No, I don't expect
you to answer that Bob. But in that the issue with porting MAX to LINUX is
based, on, I think GCC 3.2.1 now, and here we are at a 3.2.2 now, how does all
this fit together for somebody like Mikey? I've got a complete paid-in updated
Watcom V 11 , plus I've also got the just now released Version 1.1 Open Watcom
complete. It's headed for LINUX as well and so on.
Other people may not need debuggers. But I am sure not good enough to work the
programming game without one.
Just where does a poor waif like me go an plan on what to concentrate on for
producing code of any kind on OS/2 ... and whatever in the future, in your
opinion?
Advice?
--> Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)
Mike @ 1:117/3001
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)
