@matthey
thx!*I used vbcc years ago and tried phxass+gcc but I don't remember ever trying posixlib. anyway I don't think it's easy to recompile on GCC. Sometimes code is not very portable and only compiles correctly with certain GCC versions (e.g. using \ at the end of defines on GCC2.95.x usually doesn't work but works in later versions)
@wawrzon
so far i can tell aros brings posix compataiblility as well as amiga compatibility. you can prepare stuff to compile against aros and you will almost automatically get 68k stuff for amiga stable as soon as aros v1 is final. or even sooner, but unstable. staf is working on this. so no need to introduce another c library tp amiga-m68k.
ATM aros68k stuff can use ELF binaries and can avoid using classic ABI. I mean:*you can do aros 68k apps that won't work on AmigaOS3.x.
what concerns the objections voiced here by crumb and also by chris against netsurf sdl frontend. almost every time someone does anything on 68k, which is maybe not so smart (admittedly),
I love classics and that's why I point to a tool I did to help development of Reaction GUIs.
voices from mos or os4 camp try to tell us how wrong it is and that we should do that another way, compatible with theirs.
Sharing code with current OS4 port would mean much less work maintaining the OS3.x port. SDL+ixemul is alien unix and slow platform. Working on the same amiga branch means much less work in the long term. Chris is already helping pointing the parts that should be modified, I think he even modified some parts to make it easier to port to 68k.
a good example is bernds ixemul library debate. i acknowledge the authority of experienced coders like piru, but on the other hand we are given what we can get. if piru had backported mos ixemul improvements to 68k there wouldnt be the necessity for bernd to hack it.
Perhaps instead of breaking compatibility he should have renamed his version newixemul.library or something like that.
if chris or crumb, or itix would backport netsurf frontend to 68k, arti could put his sdl frontend away (perhaps). quarreling about that takes probably the amount of time it would take to implement it.
When I grow up I want to be like Chris, Itix. I haven't done any big project for Amiga, sorry. Hats off to both Arti and Novacoder for trying to actually do stuff. I'm not trying to stop them doing what they like, just trying to help them pointing to tools that could help them with Reaction GUI. If they want/like/have time they could take a look once the SDL part works.
im sorry i have no knowledge of programming and no capacity to learn it adequately. im an artist and my (amiga) time is limited too. im doing what i can. maybe im wrong, but except of all the noobs, 50% of people here work and are educated in it branche. why (for heavens sake) do i try to do that all, and those who can, dont even move a finger but complain?
I'm not complaining of Arti&Novacoder efforts! I don't think anybody complains about that... perhaps it looks like I don't move a finger but I'm quite frustrated with ixemul&clib2&libnix, damn GCC compilers and crappy non-portable unix code that don't compile or crash. There are many ready to use libnix static libraries but if you want to use ixemul these are useless. If people spent more time doing amiga shared libraries we wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel everytime. I say that because take a look at aminet, you'll see same static libraries recompiled n times for stormc, for gcc2.95 with libnix, for gcc2.95 with ixemul, damato MCCs require clib2 to compile (that's why some people couldn't recompile them for plain 68000)... if someone did a proper amiga shared library port then people using E/powerD/Blitz/SASC/StormC/vbcc/GCC+libnix/GCC+clib2/GCC2.95+ixemul/GCC3+ixemul v60... all them could use the same and we wouldn't need n times the same static code. Doing amiga shared libraries is not so easy, of course but what we get with static lib ports? nothing in the mid/long term because people uses other compilers and c libraries. Of course maintenance can be harder, but more people can collaborate. And if we share the interface with OS4/MorphOS guys there's more room for improvement and easier maintenance in the long term.
In order to avoid frustration working in the Reaction port will be better because when the SDL*AGA*port is ready you can be sure a lot of people will moan about speed (and they won't offer you reaction tools to speed up the gui part, they will just moan). SDL port is ok as an internal test "ok, everything compiles and network works, now let's do the Reaction/MUI*gui".
If I use classics & morphos is due to Amiga/MorphOS software and/or good ports, it's not due to quickly recompiled Unix CLI tools or a quickly recompiled SDL video player without even overlay support. I'm typing this from MorphOS Oddisey and you can bet that if I had to use a SDL*OWB port I would probably be using IBrowse. I respect and admire people who keeps using classics everyday.
PS:*I think you did a picture of a pegasos with a text "Pegasos ready for destruction" but don't know where I could find it (at good quality, I just saw a few Ambient backdrops).
