[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well, that's today's "something new" then. I had no idea that
> assembly under Linux would be so different to Windows. (Which
> assembler do you use on Windows by the way?)

It used to be TASM (Turbo Assembler), but when Borland discontinued it
and certain bugs made development difficult I switched to MASM
(Microsoft Assembler). TASM was the far superior choice when I started
out but fortunately MASM has caught up a bit in the meantime and now
is up to the task.

>> It might be more sensible to continue using a Windows assembler and
>> hoping that the Linux linker can cope with the resulting object
>> format. Not sure how well that would work out.
> I suspect it wouldn't like it one little bit. Too different from the
> ELF format used on Linux.

Well, the ld man page says it could work, but in practice... who
knows.

> If it could use the Windows files, we wouldn't need Wine and so on,
> we could just do a LoadLibrary() or similar system call I suppose.

No, that's an entirely different topic. Object file linking could
work, but this of course does not change the fact that it uses a lot
of Win32 API calls.

> Yes I remember an early version that I had worked fine on an old PC
> of mine. When I upgraded the PC, it failed with a divide by zero
> error because of some timing loop configuration whatsname was
> running far too fast on the new PC!

Yes, but that problem was only the installer, which was programmed in
Turbo Pascal. Its runtime library had a notorious bug which resulted
in the described problem when ran on a too fast PCs.

> I may be able to use the CVS version for free though - but I cannot
> get to that URL from here. Will try later at home if Alison gives me
> some play time!

Well, but if you're concerned that you don't have enough time to give
Cedega a quick spin then I'm not sure you're ready to port QPC,
something that is certainly equivalent to a fulltime job for a few
months ;)

> At work I have a similar PC with 2G of RAM and that struggles to
> run VMWare as well. With a Windows build it takes 20 minutes to load Windows.
> Completely unworkable I'm afraid.

Strange, the performance I've heard of is far better than that.

Marcel

_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to