Hi, On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Bernd Blaauw <bbla...@home.nl> wrote: > Op 11-8-2012 10:06, Rugxulo schreef: > >> Anyways, I figured I'd go ahead and upload this patch (and the FD Edit >> one) to iBiblio for completeness. I mean, I don't know what else to >> do, any better ideas?? > > Patched binaries would work for me, and then either updated source or > old source + diff/patchfile. Afterwards I'll download them then.
It's often a pain trying to rebuild things, if it's even possible at all, so yes, binaries (and/or binary patches) are often better. But for GPL-friendly software, source code and source patches are more preferable. > In other words: I've got no clue about setting up development > environments and a decent workflow. > That likely also explains why I'm not that fond of tiny updates for 1.1 > but prefer stuff to go into 1.2 despite current 1.1 flaws in certain areas. Well, what is the best way to provide binary patches? Do any DOS developers around here have any experience in that area? I did similar with GNU Emacs recently mainly because it was kinda a pain to rebuild everything. I used Hiew to hack the raw assembly, used "fc /b" to diff, and rolled my own wimpy .c program to apply it (since Debug was quickly ruled out, it doesn't like saving to .EXEs). I later discovered that Xdelta (even DJGPP's old 1.1.2 in /current/v2apps/ ) would've worked okay too, but that's yet another download for end user, and I wanted a textual way to patch via e-mail or similar online discussion (and Google Groups didn't accept UUencode inlined into a message). I mean, who wants to download MBs of compiler crud and more MBs of sources just to fix a silly bug?? FD EDIT doesn't seem to compile in TC20 anymore. Though it worked fine for me with TC++101, but that's not freeware from Embarcadero anymore. It may? (or at least used to) optionally compile with OpenWatcom, but I haven't personally tried yet. (Seems Aitor's build internally says "Borland C++ from 1991" while my TC++101 says "Turbo C++ from 1990". In other words, an XDelta is almost as big as the new .EXE itself due to differing compilers, so that's a bust.) FD KEYB uses TP7, which ain't freeware, so we're kinda stuck there. Luckily, it's only a one-byte patch (thanks to Tom E.), very easy to apply. You could legitimately complain and say new developers should use free/libre tools, but most of this code is legacy, and people are very strongly attached (often with good reason) to their old tools (often with no modern counterpart). Kinda unavoidable, I guess, so I don't want to suggest anything drastic. I don't know. Honestly, I almost hate to upload a patched binary of these in lieu of the official maintainer, but source patches are okay. But hey, if we have no other easy choice, I'll do it. (Advice welcome.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
