Re: A89: Survey for the next version of PlusShell

Re: A89: Survey for the next version of PlusShell

• To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
• Subject: Re: A89: Survey for the next version of PlusShell
• From: Xavier VASSOR - The Doors Team <doors@altern.org>
• Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 23:09:44 +0100
• Delivered-To: assembly-89-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
• In-Reply-To: <005801be0db6$5a4f2da0$ee702299@rwagner>
• Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org

>Should the next version of PlusShell default to outputting assembly programs
>which require no kernel or libraries?
>
>All this will not cause another change in the binary format of assembly
>programs.  The current format used by the latest versions of PlusShell and
>Doors OS can easily be used to make "stand-alone" programs which require no
>shell or kernel or libraries.  The kernel and libraries will always be
>included to allow users to use them if they choose to.  There would be no
>removal of features, just a change in the default.  This default can be
>overridden by recompilation or conversion if desired.

What I was thinking to implement in DoorsOS would be 3 modes:
 - normal : the actual compilation mode
 - no_stub: like no_stub in Plusshell, but the user can't use libs, etc..
 - no_kernel: I don't know if it's possible, but it would be like the old
Plusshell compilation mode (the kernel is included in the compiled file)

Do you think it should be done ?


Xavier VASSOR
---The Doors Team
E-mail:xvassor@mail.dotcom.fr
Doors Homepage: http://doorshome.home.ml.org
ICQ:10241721

• A89: Survey for the next version of PlusShell
• From: "Rusty Wagner" <river@gte.net>

• Prev: Re: A89: Survey for the next version of PlusShell
• Next: Re: A89: Survey for the next version of PlusShell
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread