harmon@abvax.icd.ab.com (Larry Harmon) (07/24/87)
Does anyone know if Tandy is still planning to release a "development kit" for os9 level II in the coco 3? If so when? I have been using the old C compiler, which can run four times faster under level II, but I sure wish new definition header files and i/o function libraries were available. A vi type editor supporting 80 column and ed functionality would be a blessing too. I have been using "tsedit" in a 32 column window to edit and compiling in another 80 column window. The ability to look at compiler errors then switch back to the editor is great, but having to use the old 32 column screen is a hinderance. I think the coco3 could be a usefull low cost developnemt machine if the right tools could be obtained. Does anyone have a good development setup they could describe? Larry Harmon
pete@wlbr.EATON.COM (Pete Lyall) (07/27/87)
In article <26@abvax.icd.ab.com> harmon@abvax.icd.ab.com (Larry Harmon) writes: > > Does anyone know if Tandy is still planning to release a >"development kit" for os9 level II in the coco 3? If so when? >I have been using the old C compiler, which can run four times faster under >level II, but I sure wish new definition header files and i/o function >libraries were available. A vi type editor supporting 80 column and >ed functionality would be a blessing too. I have been using "tsedit" >in a 32 column window to edit and compiling in another 80 column window. The >ability to look at compiler errors then switch back to the editor is >great, but having to use the old 32 column screen is a hinderance. I think >the coco3 could be a usefull low cost developnemt machine if the right tools >could be obtained. Does anyone have a good development setup they could >describe? > Yes - to my knowledge, there will still be a developer's kit. A few nice surprises in it too... among them, a 6809 version of 'Make', and the RMA assembler as opposed to the ASM assembler. Also, DEFS files and '.h' files, although I understand that *some* DEFS files have been mistakenly omitted. I'm sure there will be a way to obtain them. Re: an 80 coulmn 'vi' type editor, Bob Santy has just posted patches to the OS9 Forum for the Tsedit package to use 80 columns, etc. You must also have the utility Ipatch (Install-Patch - also written by Santy, as well as MakPatch form a very nice patch writer/applier toolkit.). If we (comp.sys.m6809) can agree on a method for posting, I will happily post Ipatch/Makpatch and the Tsedit patches. I should bring up the fact that we have been using a utility called "ar" for well over a year now, and it has become our standard method of packaging and compressing files. It is similar in *concept* to MS-DOS's ARC. I would prefer the following scenario: a) Post a UUENCODED version of 'ar' to the net. With docs, of course. b) Post UUENCODED 'ar' formatted files for all future submissions. For the curious, yes - I have source to 'ar', and I believe am free to distribute it.
pete@wlbr.EATON.COM (Pete Lyall) (07/27/87)
Re: previous msg - sorry... latest version of NEWS software we
installed here rejected my .signature (>4 lines) on the last message.
Hopefully, it'll appear below..
--
Pete Lyall
Usenet: {trwrb, scgvaxd, ihnp4, voder, vortex}!wlbr!pete
Compuserve: 76703,4230 (OS9 Sysop) OS9 (home): (805)-985-0632 (24hr./1200 baud)jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (07/29/87)
I agree with using 'ar' files where object code is being sent.
Source codes are a more judgemental problem. In keeping with Net
philosophy, where the code is not too large, or may be useful to
systems other than OS-9, we should be posting them in straight
ASCII (shar'd where there are multiple files). If the source
code is fairly large and fairly OS-9 specific, but in reasonable
demand, then I think 'ar' files are best. If demand isn't sufficient,
of course, we have no business wasting Net $$$ posting at all.
Cheers! -- Jim O.
PS: I *hope* you can post 'ar'. I had a copy a long time ago and
as luck would have it, it's long gone. :-)
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomurapete@wlbr.EATON.COM (Pete Lyall) (07/30/87)
In article <1955@lsuc.UUCP> jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) writes: > > I agree with using 'ar' files where object code is being sent. >Source codes are a more judgemental problem. In keeping with Net >philosophy, where the code is not too large, or may be useful to >systems other than OS-9, we should be posting them in straight >ASCII (shar'd where there are multiple files). If the source >code is fairly large and fairly OS-9 specific, but in reasonable >demand, then I think 'ar' files are best. If demand isn't sufficient, >of course, we have no business wasting Net $$$ posting at all. I concur - small trivial sources should be in ASCII. I usually 'ar' stuff not only for the compression, but also for the grouping, which SHAR can of course accomplish. I usually prefer to send: a) Binary b) Source c) A brief '.hlp' file for the HELP directory (if used) d) A 'man page' equivalent detailing the operation I will be posting a UUENCODED copy of the 6809 version of 'ar' (binary) shortly, along with related docs. If there's demand, I will later post a 68K version of the binary, and sources if required. Once the 'ar's are out in the trenches, I will post some goodies in 'ar' format. For those waiting for Bob Santy's MakPatch/Ipatch utilities, I have received his permission to post them here. It appears that he is also on the net, but I'm not sure where. Following MakPatch and Ipatch, I will be posting his Tsedit patches, which allow it to be used as an 80 column 'vi' type editor on a coco3. Whew! I feel like I'm 'posting central' out here!! -- Pete Lyall Usenet: {trwrb, scgvaxd, ihnp4, voder, vortex}!wlbr!pete Compuserve: 76703,4230 (OS9 Sysop) OS9 (home): (805)-985-0632 (24hr./1200 baud)
jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (08/01/87)
I'd appreciate it if you could post the AR sources. The 68K object
file would probably help too.
Here's something interesting: I just received an executable for AR
to run on the Atari ST under TOS. I'm not exactly sure *how* useful it
would really be though. Now that we have 'tosrd', we can 'AR' the files
on the OS-9 side anyway. If I find it really helps I'll post it anyway,
but if there's demand I'll post it now. Please send mail requests if
you want it.
Cheers! -- Jim O.
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomurarms@frog.UUCP (Bob Santy, Software) (08/03/87)
I am at "Charles River Data Systems" in Framingham Massachusetts. My apologies to Pete Lyall for having to be Posting Central, but I haven't yet got my COCO III OS9 work station in place here. When that's done, I'll be in a better position to help Pete out. Bob Santy
jonh@tekgen.TEK.COM (Jon Howell) (08/04/87)
>Whew! I feel like I'm 'posting central' out here!! Well, we need someone! Where'd Jim O go? Jon Howell -- ___ __ , __ __ _ , , __ , , ___ __ | |_ | |_ / / \ |\ /| |_\ | | | |_ | -- It's good for your | |_ |_ |_ \__ \_/ | V | | \_/ | |_ * health!
pete@wlbr.EATON.COM (Pete Lyall) (08/05/87)
In article <1540@frog.UUCP> rms@frog.UUCP (Bob Santy, Software) writes: > >I am at "Charles River Data Systems" in Framingham Massachusetts. My >apologies to Pete Lyall for having to be Posting Central, but I haven't >yet got my COCO III OS9 work station in place here. When that's done, >I'll be in a better position to help Pete out. >>Whew! I feel like I'm 'posting central' out here!! >Well, we need someone! Where'd Jim O go? Okay you guys.. cut that out! I was *kidding* <note smile on my face>. BTW - Jim Omura is still in the wings.. ah.. lurking! -- Pete Lyall Usenet: {trwrb, scgvaxd, ihnp4, voder, vortex}!wlbr!pete Compuserve: 76703,4230 (OS9 Sysop) OS9 (home): (805)-985-0632 (24hr./1200 baud)