[Python-Dev] Patch Req. # 1351020 & 1351036: PythonD modifications

[decker@dacafe.com]

<quote who="jepler at unpythonic.net">
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 11:06:16PM +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> decker at dacafe.com wrote:
>> > I would appreciate feedback concerning these patches before the next
>> > "PythonD" (for DOS/DJGPP) is released.
>>
>> PEP 11 says that DOS is not supported anymore since Python 2.0. So
>> I am -1 on reintroducing support for it.


The local python community here in Sydney indicated that python.org is
only upset when groups port the source to 'obscure' systems and *don't*
submit patches... It is possible that I was misinformed.


> If we have someeone who is volunteering the time to make it work, not just
> today
> but in the future as well, we shouldn't rule out re-adding support.


I am not sure about the future myself. DJGPP 2.04 has been parked at beta
for two years now. It might be fair to say that the *general* DJGPP
developer base has shrunk a little bit. But the PythonD userbase has
actually grown since the first release three years ago. For the time
being, people get very angry when the servers go down here :-)


> I've taken a glance at the patch.  There are probably a few things to
> quarrel
> over--for instance, it looks like a site.py change will cause python to
> print
> a blank line when it's started, and the removal of a '#define HAVE_FORK 1'
> in
> posixmodule.c---but this still doesn't mean the re-addition of DOS as a
> supported
> platform should be rejected out of hand.


Well, that's for sure! These patches have never been reviewed by
python.org before, so I am sure that there are *plenty* of ways to better
fit DOS support into the Python source.

Fork will never work under DOS, no matter how much we dream :-)

The empty line 'print' was a legacy error to kludge the ANSI color scheme
to work correctly. Long story. It can be ignored. In fact, none of the
changes to site.py are essential for python to work under DOS. They are
'additions' that most of the PythonD userbase seem to enjoy, but few knew
how to do for themselves at one time. But they aren't essential tto the
port.

The important aspects are the path and stat stuff. Nothing works without
them. I should mention that one thing that never did get ported was the
build scripts themselves to accomodate DJGPP-DOS. For a complete port, we
must still look at Modules/makesetup to remember that although directory
separators "\\" or "/" are OK, the path separator ":" is definitely not.
";" must be used.

So far, we have simply changed Setup and the Makefiles by hand after
initial confiure.


Ben


-----------------------------------------
Stay ahead of the information curve.
Receive MCAD news and jobs on your desktop daily.
Subscribe today to the MCAD CafeNews newsletter.
[ http://www10.mcadcafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ]
It's informative and essential.