I still can't read your list mails very well, but I was able to pick through most of this. (No, my e-mail utility which has worked for a good many years and doesn't fail on other user comments is not buggy and therefore in need of replacement. Although, it could use an update or change-over for other reasons.)
At 07:11 PM 8/4/2006 +0400, Arkady V.Belousov wrote: > I think, build subsystem _should_ be _added_ before "final" > EMM386 >> version will be released - else, because "no more permanent, > than >> temporary", EMM386 may never get build subsystem From your remarks we've gone from "you can't use the current build system exactly as-is" to "EMM386 may never get build subsystem". That's a big leap of logic. I think it may have fallen short and fell into the Chasm of Unwarranted Conclusions. >BC> I don't think it's too hard for a developer to add his makefile BC> >himself. Yes, he may. But, for example, with different option set >resulting executable may work differently (if work at all). Nothing you've listed will change behavior here. You can worry about what would change behavior after the EMM386 rewrite and operational update which presumably is forthcoming post-1.0. You're part of the post-1.0 EMM386 rewrite team, correct? > The more so, I don't know, how Michael packs executables As I've stated on this list, several times, the executables are packed using UPX. >, so I can't reproduce _identical_ binary. The more so, currently EMM386 >sources are _not_ compilable Uh, yeah, they are compilable. Several people have done it, including me. >Michael uses some subtle trick to workaround this in his makefiles. Nope. It's pretty much the original build with the file names updated and directories redirected. Finally, quoting portions of my recent e-mail for public record: Every single person who worked with EMM386 or HIMEM source so far has been able to get it to compile sufficiently to work using a free compiler. I even wrote a translator to make it work with an open source assembler so others could build without technically violating copyrights. But I'll make one more compromise. If Arkady wants to put in place _additional_ files which satisfy him and don't modify _existing_ files, I'll take them into the distribution. <Why is this on freedos-user? freedos-devel is a better fit. But since it started here, I'll keep the replies together...> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
