The bottom line is that we need Starlink Classic in CVS. Once we do that
then many things almost certainly become easier. We will do it, but not by
next month! However we need to set a deadline and do it. Norman's work
should help.
...David
-----Original Message-----
From: Alasdair Allan [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 09 August 2003 19:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Starlink Classic and Mac OS X
> > Agreed, the whole idea of porting to Yellow Dog Linux on Mac rather
> > than Mac OS X seems a little crazed. It doesn't really lead to
> > anything that is worth announcing (I can't imagine that a huge
> > percentage of Mac users are running linux rather than OSX).
>
> I don't understand this at all! It's also true to say that only a small
> minority of PC users run Linux!
Err, yes, but our enitre customer base is included in that small
percentage...!?
> I don't see why Mac users should get effort for a native port when there
> has been no suggestion of porting Starlink software to Windows --- due
> to immense technical problems.
Because a MacOS native port would probably take a couple of days, and
Starlink doesn't have to do it. JAC is prepared to do it for us, all TimJ
wants is Starlink Classic in CVS (or at worst a copy of the "real" source
code, not the shipped code) to do the port from...
It's quite possible all a MacOS X native port will consist of is some
makefile tweaks to the linux version. It might even just compile out of
the box, after all MacOS X is just BSD UNIX with a fancy GUI on top.
Unlike a Windows port, there are no immense technical problems to
overcome...
> Just why can't Mac users dual-boot???
You have used MacOS X, right? After using it, I don't particularly want to
use Linux, let alone dual boot a perfectly good Mac... ;)
Al.
|