is it something like the bible, or should it be something reflecting (intended) reality ?
I suggest that it describes reality, but that original intentions are not removed but just marked as obsoleted.
I think, that a spec should describe the projects intention. and it's certainly not the kernels intention to be compilable with any compiler. the intention is to build a MSDOS compatible kernel; use the approriate tools (free if possible)
Yes. See my other message in the original thread:
The original intent was to have the Spec reflect what people actually _use_ so that when a new developer comes into the project, he/she will know what tools to use when contributing to FreeDOS (such as OW for C compiler, etc.)
When the Spec was first written, no open tools (suitable for 16bit deployment) were available. However, pretty much everyone on the FreeDOS lists had (or was already using) TurboC or Borland C, so TC/BC were listed as the standard. Same thing for assembly, except that's changed now too.
I'll try to get all of fd-doc updated very soon now. The Spec will be my first goal.
-jh
-- _____________________________________________________________________________ This email message has been automatically encrypted using ROT-26.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Sleepycat Software Learn developer strategies Cisco, Motorola, Ericsson & Lucent use to deliver higher performing products faster, at low TCO. http://www.sleepycat.com/telcomwpreg.php?From=osdnemail3 _______________________________________________ Freedos-kernel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
