The Sinclair QL Forum

XorA wrote: But it turns out I don't actually need to cross compile, make on QDOS is actually pretty nice.

Of course it is. (After you've catapulted yourselves 20 years back with regards to expectations on make features.)

I use it all the time, to make assembly, C and Pascal projects.

tofro wrote:

XorA wrote: But it turns out I don't actually need to cross compile, make on QDOS is actually pretty nice.

Of course it is. (After you've catapulted yourselves 20 years back with regards to expectations on make features.)

I use it all the time, to make assembly, C and Pascal projects.

You have obviously never used some of the aweful make versions I have over the years.

(microsoft staring at you)

XorA wrote:

tofro wrote:

XorA wrote: But it turns out I don't actually need to cross compile, make on QDOS is actually pretty nice.

Of course it is. (After you've catapulted yourselves 20 years back with regards to expectations on make features.)

I use it all the time, to make assembly, C and Pascal projects.

You have obviously never used some of the aweful make versions I have over the years.

(microsoft staring at you)

Guilty. I'm spoiled by GNU make.

XorA wrote:But it turns out I don't actually need to cross compile, make on QDOS is actually pretty nice.

Well, if it's only that, QMake is even nicer and works with any standard QL link file without additional effort.

mk79 wrote:

XorA wrote:But it turns out I don't actually need to cross compile, make on QDOS is actually pretty nice.

Well, if it's only that, QMake is even nicer and works with any standard QL link file without additional effort.

No that was just a dangerous side quest I found myself on while looking at QMAC macros

My main aim is to rebuild the C68 libraries so I can add functions which are now common to make porting easier. I had noticed that qmac turns up in at least one library!

XorA wrote:My main aim is to rebuild the C68 libraries so I can add functions which are now common to make porting easier. I had noticed that qmac turns up in at least one library!

I did that once and wanted to release the result as a complete C68 distribution, but never quite got around to it. Was a bit of work, especially as the official sources are missing a few files IIRC (but got them from Dave). Can revisit it if it helps you.

mk79 wrote:

XorA wrote:My main aim is to rebuild the C68 libraries so I can add functions which are now common to make porting easier. I had noticed that qmac turns up in at least one library!

I did that once and wanted to release the result as a complete C68 distribution, but never quite got around to it. Was a bit of work, especially as the official sources are missing a few files IIRC (but got them from Dave). Can revisit it if it helps you.

Do you want to collaborate on a single source of truth then?

I am going to start with libcurse as I already have an essential patch for that, that I used the library tool to replace function in library, but really could do with incorporating into sources properly.

Gents,

Would the C68 sources at some point, be put on GitHub under the SinclairQL account? Or does Dave have objections to this?

Asking for a friend. (Ok, asking for me!)

Cheers,
Norm.

NormanDunbar wrote:Gents,

Would the C68 sources at some point, be put on GitHub under the SinclairQL account? Or does Dave have objections to this?

Asking for a friend. (Ok, asking for me!)

Cheers,
Norm.

Arent they already there under xtc68?

Or did you mean the C Library Sources?

I meant everything "source filey" for the C68 system, sorry.

I had the sources on floppy, but lost all my floppies to "old age" problems. I know, from further back up this thread, that some files are missing but Marcel now has them, but I was just wondering if we could/should/would stick everything C68 Compiler System related onto the SinclairQL GitHub, for safe keeping.

Cheers,
Norm.