Moderators: Mathias, Mug UK, moondog/.tSCc., [ProToS], Galvez, Moderator Team
shoggoth wrote: - a fair deal of developers prefer to have unix tools as standard + a unix file hierarchy, since for them, that means lots of benefits when developing stuff (<---!).
Mathias wrote:shoggoth wrote: - a fair deal of developers prefer to have unix tools as standard + a unix file hierarchy, since for them, that means lots of benefits when developing stuff (<---!).
4 people!
Perhaps we can find another 5 ones, …
We are talking about the standard end-user setup! As I said already such a setup for developers existed long before that End-user setup (and you know that!). If it is so important for you, please help m0n0 and Jo Even to do it.
jens wrote:Mathias, I said in my last post, adopt EasyMiNT, so you'll probably have a setup suitable for developers.
shoggoth wrote:Fine. Pack the thing with AHCC, no unix tools, no real unix file hierarchy. For me, such a setup is as useful as a fart-flavoured popsicle... and I'm not alone. Either you understand this, or you don't. Simple as that.
Mathias wrote:• As I said already, yes that would be a perfect task for EasyMiNT!
vido wrote:Gentoo MiNT compiled for Coldfire is a great starting point by my opinion.
Beside the fact that there is no installer, just unpacking, this was always planned!simonsunnyboy wrote: For the Firebee I'd say your current approach is correct: deliver a classic working GEM experience.
Unix addons (if requested) should be shipped for installation as optional.
(...)
This way you have the best of both worlds and can deliver a setup that would please anyone?
simonsunnyboy wrote: PS: i'd like to see this GEM Mint setup for a plain Falcon
You could give it a try. But it is done in GFA (without Lonnys patches), so I am not sure.jfl wrote: I would be surprised if EasyMiNT couldn't be installed right away on the machine.
jfl wrote:- ask Helmut if he can merge his changes in TosWin2 with the version available in the FreeMiNT CVS. His changes provide a big speed increase to text output that is much needed when compiling stuff
Shouldn´t it work already. At least it was told several times.jfl wrote:- ask Alan to build his Gentoo distrib for the ColdFire (according to him, it's easy).
jfl wrote:On the other hand, I (call me crazy if you will) bought the machine to use it and vehemently refuse to use a cross-compiler. So there you have it. If I can't code on this machine because I don't have the tools, I will sell it, which will end my Atari days.
Mathias wrote:Shouldn´t it work already. At least it was told several times.jfl wrote:- ask Alan to build his Gentoo distrib for the ColdFire (according to him, it's easy).
Mathias wrote:But to understand you correctly, you are talking about GCC here, right? This would mean such a full blown setup like EasyMiNT or Gentoo. In every case you should talk to Mikro about it! Vincent refused to support it officially.jfl wrote:On the other hand, I (call me crazy if you will) bought the machine to use it and vehemently refuse to use a cross-compiler. So there you have it. If I can't code on this machine because I don't have the tools, I will sell it, which will end my Atari days.
wongck wrote:joska wrote:ifconfig and route are not unix-ports, they are written from scratch for MiNTnet and is a part of MiNT/MiNTnet. These tools exists on all systems that has sockets, like Windows. You're not claiming that Windows is unix just because it has ifconfig, route, ping etc?
.
If that's the case then the developer should just have stayed away from using the exact cryptic parameters and cryptic output format that are found in Unix, so long as they do not make it even more cryptic like the Windows counterpart.
They should have stayed to the good simple Atari GUI design.
shoggoth wrote:Facts:
- the unix file hierarchy can be stuffed in U: and hence won't get in the way for people who want things "the old Atari TOS 1.0" way.
- having access to unix tools as standard does in no way by definition restrict those who don't wish to use it.
- a fair deal of developers prefer to have unix tools as standard + a unix file hierarchy, since for them, that means lots of benefits when developing stuff (<---!).
shoggoth wrote:Fine. Pack the thing with AHCC, no unix tools, no real unix file hierarchy. For me, such a setup is as useful as a fart-flavoured popsicle... and I'm not alone. Either you understand this, or you don't. Simple as that.
joska wrote:You can't expect everything to be in place from the start, the man-power just isn't there.
vido wrote:The other way I see to make unix like distribution of MiNT which would extend existing MiNT setup into "full MiNT setup" for FireBee. Something like EasyMiNT where you can choose what programs (packages) you want to install and which replaces mint and xaaes cnf files with the right ones. That would be awesome! I believe such distribution should be done by someone else with cooperation with joska about config files.
shoggoth wrote:How about *not* turning this into a GUI vs. command line cat fight, we're grown ups.
simonsunnyboy wrote:VanillaMint is a very good start but it is just unpack and go. The Firebee setup features some setup GUI IIRC. which desktop, etc...
jfl wrote:I would be surprised if EasyMiNT couldn't be installed right away on the machine. The problem is that it will install only m68k binaries, which is not ideal for a ColdFire CPU.
joska wrote:simonsunnyboy wrote:VanillaMint is a very good start but it is just unpack and go. The Firebee setup features some setup GUI IIRC. which desktop, etc...
VanillaMiNT is the Falcon/TT version of the Firebee setup. The difference is that it's a lot smaller, because it's intended to be installed (well, *unpacked*, which is the way to "install" programs on an Atari IMO) from floppies. So there's only a single desktop and no collection of applications.
Also, there is no tool to select screen resolution, because the one on the Firebee only works with FireTOS in the background. It might work on a CT6x though, I haven't tried that.
simonsunnyboy wrote:I'm waiting for the 1.18 edition thenGreat project and it deserves support!
calimero wrote:I must ask: different version of MiNT (1.15, 1.16 ... 1.18) are only different version of mint.prg (kernel); right?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests