<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font size="-1"><font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">I have
been thinking about this for some time also.<br>
<br>
My interest is maintaining GEM as _the_ GUI for DOS. Having GEM under
Linux is fine, and a great alternative to X, but not if it moves it
away from being useful under DOS.<br>
<br>
Now, seems to me if you move towards Linux, you are moving towards
using GCC. We already have a GCC for DOS, namely, DJGPP. Seems to me
the first step is "porting" GEM to compile using DJGPP. From what I've
heard, this could be a bit of a challenge, since GEM/AES/VDI are kind
of a "mixed bag". I've got the sources, but I haven't looked at them
carefully. If GCC/DJGPP is too difficult, OpenWatcom can generate
32-bit code for both DOS and Linux. And Windows, like CygWin or
MinGW. I don't think a 16-bit compiler like Borland is the right path
to 32 bits.<br>
<br>
A public-domain OS like MMURTL is interesting, but we already have
FreeDOS and Linux OSes (and BSDs), and anyways, it appears that MMURTL
involves the use of yet another non-standard (and apparently non-free)
compiler.<br>
<br>
Any of the old-timers, was there ever an attempt to "standardize" the
build environment on something up-to-date or in common use?<br>
<br>
</font></font><font size="-1"><font
face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">Seems the next step then is
taking advantage of the native 32-bit video resources. Under Linux,
there are the wide array of device drivers. Under DOS, there are
various graphics libraries, such as GRX or MGRX, that already have
DJGPP ports.<br>
<br>
I realize this hand-waving in ignorance is easy, but any project would
have a better chance of success of attracting participants with a clear
path and objective. I know I would enjoy participating!<br>
<br>
</font></font>
</body>
</html>