On 10/29/2017 11:00 PM, Ralf Quint wrote: > Well, I happily invite you to provide us with a free development tool > that will work in our case and fits your (IMHO) overly idealistic POV.
I'm the one who started this mail chain. It started as a mere inquiry (on behalf of a friend, really) as to whether gcc would be a viable compiler. I got my answer: it's not. I never said that we should reject FreeDOS because it lacks an FSF-approved compiler. I'm just saying that your particular reason for not being concerned about it lacks substance. I think the real argument to be made against trying to change now is the fact that this is a niche system and simply will not attract the number of developers required to make that a reality. It's an argument of feasibility, not principle, and I accept that. It has obviously been a goal for FreeDOS to be a fully free system, and what's a free system if it has proprietary dependencies? I was made aware of the -m16 flag, didn't know how new it was, and I asked the people on this list who are more knowledgeable about building software for DOS than I am if it would work. I am willing to accept that it's not feasible to make a new compiler, but that doesn't mean we ought to be fully content, that's all. Happy Hacking, David E. McMackins II Supporting Member, Electronic Frontier Foundation Associate Member, Free Software Foundation (#12889) www.mcmackins.org www.delwink.com www.eff.org www.gnu.org www.fsf.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
