[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: OS/2 Porting
In <ufd96oyi6q.fsf@ftp.ardi.com>, Clifford T. Matthews <ctm@ardi.com> writes:
>ARDI has tentatively already planned to port Executor to OS/2. I
>don't think we could be more serious then that. We can't start any
>new projects until Executor 2 is shipping though.
Cliff, can you say whether an OS/2 port would take priority over a
Win32 port, or would at least proceed at the same priority as a Win32
port?
ARDI has been very nice about telling its customers what its plans are,
and I'd just like to nail this one down "for the record."
>You are right, a native OS/2 version of Executor will be more
>efficient than E/D.
And can be much more feature rich. Mac file system handling could
easily be programmed using an IFS, something that I had been toying
around with writing a while back. Many of the Mac functions could
be directly mapped to OS/2 APIs (like the original way Windows
software was planned to run under OS/2, and the way DAX works
now.) In fact, as has been detailed in some of the comp.os.os2 news-
groups, Executor could be almost be implemented using OpenDoc
(e.g., defining a method for manipulating Mac executables instead of
establishing your own run-time environment. The proposal of which
I speak is making a Web browser an OpenDoc part, like Apple's
CyberDog.)
>We will approach IBM when we have our first publicly demonstrable E/D
>2.0 beta CD-ROMs out. This should be "soon".
Keep us informed!
---
- Joseph LoCicero, IV | Grey is not the color I expected -
- jolo@ece.cmu.edu | On someone who's so often touched by grace -
- Think smarter, not harder | The eyes that hold the promise of perfection -
- Team OS/2 Use Warp! | Will find the flaw that no one can erase... -
References: