Re: ADA for OS/2

[John Poltorak <jp@eyup.org>]

"David W. Noon" wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Jul 3901 21:57:20, John Poltorak <jp@eyup.org> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > It really does seem unfair... If you use NT everything is on a plate. You
> > just download a binary archive and you can be happily using GNAT 3.13p
> > within a few minutes without requiring any knowledge of building
> > compilers.
>
> It is only right that software suppliers should have a lower
> expectation of the skills of Windows users: they have usually had the
> OS foisted on them when they are first "trying the water" in
> computing.
>
> > If you use OS/2, the same task is going to take several weeks
> > or months.
>
> Not necessarily.

I don't know if you realise what you are letting yourself in for...


> > I don't know anyone who has been successful building OS/2
> > binaries, which  kind of begs the question who is the OS/2 patch designed
> > for?
>
> People like me, who have been programming for donkey's years and
> programming OS/2 for quite a few years within that period.
>
> > I note the OS/2 patch is 8000 lines long which is twice as long as
> > all the other patches put together, and I think if someone is going to the
> > trouble of providing such complicated patches, their work will not be very
> > well appreciated if no one can make any use of it. Maybe providing a
> > simple build script is all that is necessary to make it work...
>
> The term "build script" will cause many developers to shudder. The
> usual term is "makefile",

No, not really. By build script I'm talking  about all the processes involved in
building an app.

This is likely to include retrieving a tarball, unarchiving it, obtaining and
applying several patches and then running autoconf and configure before you even
have  makefile to use with make. Being able to run make means you can see the
light at the end of the tunnel.


> but the exact nature of this is determined
> by the make utility one uses. I use DMAKE 4.0 for OS/2, and when I get
> around to building GNAT that will be the maker I use, even if I have
> to coerce the makefile a bit.

I suspect you will not get very far trying to use DMAKE for building GNAT.

> Even so, a makefile is not necessarily
> useful to an end-user; but if that end-user fancies himself as a
> programmer it *should* be enough.
>
> Anyhow, watch the OS2PROG echo on Fidonet and see what turns up.

I haven't accessed Fidonet for a long time, and most people don't use it much
these days.
If you have any news can you post it here or on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc?

> I
> might also post an announcement here. The initial d/l site will be
> Pete Norloff's BBS, later Hobbes and Leo.

I'm hoping to build up unixos2.org as the major file repository for apps which
are normally ported from a Unix environment. I'd like to get it on there if/when
you manage to build it. Hope that's OK...



>
> Regards
>
> Dave
>
> [Remove spamtraps to reply by e-mail]

--
John