DOS ain't dead

DJGPP love Window$ ? (Developers)

posted by georgpotthast , Germany, 15.09.2013, 10:14

> Most modern programs just aren't designed
> to care about anything like DJGPP. But that is their problem (by design or
> ignorance), not ours.
>
Since I try to port these programs to DOS this is a big problem for me. Even programs that used to support djgpp drop djgpp support now since they see no reason for supporting djgpp any more and probably can no longer test it.


>
> DJGPP is not fast. Or I should say GCC isn't very fast. You really need a
> cache loaded. And even then, a lot of it is still slower than ideal because
> it has to load lots of files to RAM from hard drive. Also, I'm not sure the
> linker is very optimal. It tries to do a billion optimizations, and it's
> not really geared towards compiling without it. In other words, you'd
> expect it to be 10x faster without optimizations, but it's not. If compile
> speed is important, DJGPP may not be for you. (Though careful use of
> makefiles can help prevent rebuilding unnecessary parts. You should really
> only recompile what's changed.) Oh yeah, lack of precompiled headers, blah
> blah blah. "Just use FPC!"

In Windows XP I do not complain about the speed of gcc compiling a program. Yes, if you are using a makefile only the modified file will be compiled and then the package linked again, this can also be done in real mode DOS without leaving the PC for a cup of coffee.

I just did s speed test on my PC compiling complete Dillo:
Windows XP DOS box: 2 Minutes, 9 Seconds
Real Mode DOS: 24 Minutes, 43 Seconds.

>
> > I guess one could copy the required files to an XMSDISK and develop
> there
> > but I did not try that yet.
>
> Yes, a year ago I timed (re)compiling p7zip (G++) under bare FreeDOS with
> and without LFNs, both with compiler installed to RAM disk and traditional
> hard drive install. The fastest way was a). without LFNs (but needed lots
> of patching to the project, which always assumed certain names), and b).
> compiler itself installed to RAM (easily 2x or 3x faster than only cache +
> HD install).

I tried now to copy djgpp and the dillo source to an xmsdisk. Howver, that did not work since I could not get doslfn to support long file names on the xmsdisk.

Georg

Complete thread:

• DJGPP love Window$ ? - iw2evk, 14.09.2013, 14:07
  • DJGPP love Window$ ? - georgpotthast, 14.09.2013, 18:08
    • DJGPP love Window$ ? - iw2evk, 14.09.2013, 18:48
      • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Laaca, 15.09.2013, 07:38
      • DJGPP love Window$ ? - georgpotthast, 15.09.2013, 09:10
      • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Laaca, 15.09.2013, 12:13
        • DJGPP love Window$ ? - bocke, 16.09.2013, 02:54
    • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 14.09.2013, 20:36
      • DJGPP love Window$ ? - iw2evk, 15.09.2013, 09:13
        • DJGPP love Window$ ? - georgpotthast, 15.09.2013, 10:49
          • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 15.09.2013, 20:32
            • DJGPP love Window$ ? - bocke, 16.09.2013, 02:53
      • DJGPP love Window$ ? - georgpotthast, 15.09.2013, 10:14
        • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 15.09.2013, 20:08
          • DJGPP love Window$ ? - RayeR, 16.09.2013, 13:45
          • DJGPP love Window$ ? - georgpotthast, 16.09.2013, 20:56
            • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 01.10.2013, 08:25
        • DJGPP love Window$ ? - marcov, 16.09.2013, 19:58
          • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 02.10.2013, 22:52
            • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 05.10.2013, 22:50
              • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 20.10.2013, 00:55
                • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 20.10.2013, 01:59
                  • DJGPP love Window$ ? - marcov, 20.10.2013, 21:28
                    • DJGPP love Window$ ? - Rugxulo, 22.10.2013, 01:17