Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-devel] OS/2 and DLLs
On Thu, December 18, 2014 21:54, Tomas Hajny wrote: On Thu, December 18, 2014 19:49, Ralf Quint wrote: On 12/17/2014 2:56 PM, mark diener wrote: Ralf, I am not goint to tell you to do anything, but gently suggest that you chill out. Well, how about you live what you are preaching? I'd like to ask everybody to stop responding to this part of the thread and restrict him/herself to on topic messages on this list. Switching to fpc-other as a more appropriate space: I believe that although my time available for FPC is quite limited, my activities related to OS/2 target in FPC in the last few years show more than clearly that I want to continue support of this target regardless of the number of users lower compared to some other targets as long as my work helps at least someone. In this context, I'd like to thank everybody who expressed his interest in this target. Note that I don't aim to convince people that they should stop using their preferred platform and switch to OS/2, and I won't participate in any kind of advocacy discussion about why OS/2 should continue to be used, etc. Thanks again Tomas ___ fpc-other maillist - fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other
Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-devel] OS/2 and DLLs
2014-12-17 21:38 GMT+01:00 rpzrpz...@gmail.com rpzrpz...@gmail.com: Ralf, Such passion for obsolescence... What is the use case other than a hobby and pride for OS/2 support? Hopefully, FPC core maintainers are not distracted by the legacy support. FPC maintainers don't hesitate to stop supporting lagacy OS-es, if necessary: http://wiki.freepascal.org/User_Changes_Trunk#Windows_9x_series Vincent ___ fpc-other maillist - fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other
Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-devel] OS/2 and DLLs
Tomas Hajny wrote: Switching to fpc-other as a more appropriate space: I believe that although my time available for FPC is quite limited, my activities related to OS/2 target in FPC in the last few years show more than clearly that I want to continue support of this target regardless of the number of users lower compared to some other targets as long as my work helps at least someone. In this context, I'd like to thank everybody who expressed his interest in this target. Note that I don't aim to convince people that they should stop using their preferred platform and switch to OS/2, and I won't participate in any kind of advocacy discussion about why OS/2 should continue to be used, etc. Noting somebody's earlier comment about the lack of DLL support being due to a linker limitation, I think this is unfortunate since when OS/2 came out the fact that the binary formats were well-documented and supported by at least two linkers (MS and TopSpeed) was a significant advantage. I presume that the early enthusiasm had largely dissipated by the time IBM started pushing it as a 32-bit OS, with a new binary format etc. -- Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues] ___ fpc-other maillist - fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other
