From: UnixOS2 Archive
To: "UnixOS2 Archive" <UnixOS2_Archive at unixos2.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:03:37 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600
Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 109

**************************************************
Sunday 27 April 2003
 Number  109
**************************************************

Subjects for today
 
1   OT: Kris rant : Steve Wendt <stevew at shocking.com>
2  Re:  OT: Kris rant : Steven Levine" <steve53 at earthlink.net>
3  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2! : Stefan Neis <neis at cdc.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>
4  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2! : Stefan Neis <neis at cdc.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>
5  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2! : Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
6  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2! : Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
7  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2! : Bart van Leeuwen" <Bart_van_Leeuwen at netage.nl>
8  GCC 3.22 (was Re:  OT: Kris rant) : Dave and Natalie" <dave_yeo at mindlink.bc.ca>
9  Re:  OT: Kris rant : John Poltorak <jp at warpix.org>

**= Email   1 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 12:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
From:  Steve Wendt <stevew at shocking.com>
Subject:   OT: Kris rant

On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Kris Steenhaut wrote:

> Or to put it blunt: whenever M$ will say NO, it will be NO. Dunno
> whether M$ told NO to GoldenCode systems, but it looks suspicious into
> that way.

What does Microsoft have to do with GoldenCode?



**= Email   2 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 12:42:31 -0700
From:  "Steven Levine" <steve53 at earthlink.net>
Subject:  Re:  OT: Kris rant

In <20030428120645.S49113-100000 at fingers.shocking.com>, on 04/28/03 
   at 12:07 PM, Steve Wendt <stevew at shocking.com> said:

>What does Microsoft have to do with GoldenCode?

There are OS/2 users and there are paranoid OS/2 users.  Kris appears to
often reside in the latter category. :-)

Steven

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Steven Levine" <steve53 at earthlink.net>  MR2/ICE 2.37 #10183 Warp4/FP15/14.085_W4
www.scoug.com irc.webbnet.org #scoug (Wed 7pm PST)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


**= Email   3 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:45:46 +0200 (CEST)
From:  Stefan Neis <neis at cdc.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Subject:  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2!

On Fri, 18 Apr 2003, Kris Steenhaut wrote:

> So the question is: can it do without support?
> 
> I don't know. But when there is a price tag that high for support common 
> sense tells there is a catch somewhere.

IIRC, Cygnus price tag for defect support for gcc on unix platforms and
for cygwin is about the same order of magnitude and that isn't something
which makes anybody wonder ...

> > They must have had a business case
> >
> Don't forget  M$ is leading the business now.

Nope. They bought Connectix, the virtual PC company, but Innotek is
unconnected to MS for all I know (except that they now have to cooperate
with MS instead of Connectix to get a current Virtual PC for OS/2 :-( ). 

	Regards,
		Stefan
-- 
Micro$oft is not an answer. It is a question. The answer is 'no'.


**= Email   4 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:50:28 +0200 (CEST)
From:  Stefan Neis <neis at cdc.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Subject:  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2!

On Fri, 18 Apr 2003, Kris Steenhaut wrote:

> Not sure wat you want to say. But sure it is Innotek wants us to move 
> away from OS/2:
> 
> >
> > "People migrating away from legacy OS/2 are the principle users of the 
> > Connectix Windows client product. Microsoft is fully committed to 
> > carrying that effort forward and to helping those sun-setting OS/2 in 
> > 2006 migrate over to XP."
> > Roy McDonald, CEO, Connectix Corp.

You are aware that you're quoting Innotek's quote of the Connectix/MS
opinion, aren't you? Innotek may or may not share that opinion ... ;-)

	Regards,
		Stefan


**= Email   5 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:55:00 +0200
From:  Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
Subject:  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2!



Stefan Neis schreef:

>Nope. They bought Connectix, the virtual PC company, but Innotek is
>unconnected to MS for all I know (except that they now have to cooperate
>with MS instead of Connectix to get a current Virtual PC for OS/2 :-( ). 
>  
>

Indeed. Which means M$ is leading the _business_. After all, it is about 
$$$ and not about principles.
Or to put it blunt: whenever M$ will say NO, it will be NO. Dunno 
whether M$ told NO to GoldenCode systems, but it looks suspicious into 
that way.

-- 
Groeten uit Gent,

   Kris



**= Email   6 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 18:00:26 +0200
From:  Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
Subject:  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2!



Stefan Neis schreef:

>You are aware that you're quoting Innotek's quote of the Connectix/MS
>opinion, aren't you? Innotek may or may not share that opinion ... ;-)
>
>  
>
I am aware I am quoting Innotek's quote of the quote. After all my 
"quote" comes from the _Innotek site_, not from any M$/Connectix one.

And in doing so Innotek is making a plea to move to M$. Just plain logics.

-- 
Groeten uit Gent,

   Kris



**= Email   7 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 19:16:01 +0200
From:  "Bart van Leeuwen" <Bart_van_Leeuwen at netage.nl>
Subject:  Re:  InnoTek GCC for OS/2!


Kris,

Why is it that you are trying to create a negative atmosphere around this
rather nice achievement ?
Are you programming with gcc 3.2.1 ?? did you run into trouble ?? did you
ask the innotek people for help ??

I did all three off them and they were to great help to me.. can't imagine
if you would ask for they wouldn't help you.

you sound like a dissatisfied customer, but I think you don't even use the
product ? furthermore I don't think this list is intended for OS/2
advocay/politics.

but with unixos2 related question you can always popup here !

With Regards
Bart van Leeuwen


**= Email   8 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:20:05 -0800
From:  "Dave and Natalie" <dave_yeo at mindlink.bc.ca>
Subject:  GCC 3.22 (was Re:  OT: Kris rant)

On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:56:32 +0100, John Poltorak wrote:

>Is there nothing more interesting to talk about than Kris' paranoia?

I wonder what GCC moving away from EMX will mean to us? Mike Kapley said in a Mozilla bug that they are waiting for GCC 3.22 which won't have any EMX dependecies.
Anyways it's good that AZ is getting paid for porting GCC
Dave



**= Email   9 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:56:32 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at warpix.org>
Subject:  Re:  OT: Kris rant

On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 12:42:31PM -0700, Steven Levine wrote:
> In <20030428120645.S49113-100000 at fingers.shocking.com>, on 04/28/03 
>    at 12:07 PM, Steve Wendt <stevew at shocking.com> said:
> 
> >What does Microsoft have to do with GoldenCode?
> 
> There are OS/2 users and there are paranoid OS/2 users.  Kris appears to
> often reside in the latter category. :-)

Is there nothing more interesting to talk about than Kris' paranoia?
 
> Steven
> 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Steven Levine" <steve53 at earthlink.net>  MR2/ICE 2.37 #10183 Warp4/FP15/14.085_W4
> www.scoug.com irc.webbnet.org #scoug (Wed 7pm PST)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 


-- 
John