using elks-libc for DOS development

using elks-libc for DOS development

[Ryan Underwood]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1055 bytes --]


Hi,

I want to do some 16-bit development for FreeDOS on embedded 8086.
Is bcc + ELKS libc suitable enough to e.g. replace Turbo C for this
task?  Looking through the source, I see some normal functions like
geninterrupt() are stubbed out, and some other things like intdos do not
exist.  Basically, I need to use software interrupts for DOS API, and to
install my own interrupt handler as a TSR and invoke it from another
program too.  I am also needing to handle external hardware interrupts
such as the system timer.

Besides ELKS libc, are there any other free C libraries suitable for
16-bit DOS application development?  I find a 16-bit version of DJGPP,
but it has no C library. :(  I would use a 32-bit version of DJGPP, but
the device only has 512k of memory; the necessity of the DPMI server
would be a waste, as well as the bloat of glibc.  I guess there is
Open Watcom now, but does anyone have experience doing small footprint
(8086 <= 1MB) C development with it?

Thanks!

-- 
Ryan Underwood, <nemesis@icequake.net>

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: using elks-libc for DOS development

[David Given]

On Friday 05 March 2004 7:42 am, Ryan Underwood wrote:
[...]
> Besides ELKS libc, are there any other free C libraries suitable for
> 16-bit DOS application development?  I find a 16-bit version of DJGPP,
> but it has no C library. :(  I would use a 32-bit version of DJGPP, but
> the device only has 512k of memory; the necessity of the DPMI server
> would be a waste, as well as the bloat of glibc.  I guess there is
> Open Watcom now, but does anyone have experience doing small footprint
> (8086 <= 1MB) C development with it?

Nope. I gather it works, though.

However, if you know where to look there are a number of free 16-bit DOS 
compilers. Leaving aside all the various CP/M86 compilers --- which tend to 
be K&R only and only compile tiny mode --- a quick web search reveals these:

http://www.htsoft.com/products/pacific/
http://www.digitalmars.com/download/freecompiler.html

You may be better off sticking with Turbo C, however; it is free, and you seem 
to be set up for it.

-- 
+- David Given --McQ-+ Q: What's yellow and equivalent to the axiom of
|  dg@cowlark.com    | choice?
| (dg@tao-group.com) | A: Zorn's Lemon.
+- www.cowlark.com --+ 

Re: using elks-libc for DOS development

[Ryan Underwood]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1778 bytes --]


On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 11:03:18AM +0000, David Given wrote:
> > would be a waste, as well as the bloat of glibc.  I guess there is
> > Open Watcom now, but does anyone have experience doing small footprint
> > (8086 <= 1MB) C development with it?
> 
> Nope. I gather it works, though.

So did I.  I think I will give it a shot.  I preferred bcc/ELKS-libc
because I could build directly from a Linux host without having to use
WINE/DOSEMU.  But I think Watcom will suffice if the ELKS libc proves to
be too slim.

> However, if you know where to look there are a number of free 16-bit DOS 
> compilers. Leaving aside all the various CP/M86 compilers --- which tend to 
> be K&R only and only compile tiny mode --- a quick web search reveals these:
> 
> http://www.htsoft.com/products/pacific/
> http://www.digitalmars.com/download/freecompiler.html

Thanks.  I actually ran across these while digging around but didn't pay
much attention.  Both look like fairly complete packages.

> You may be better off sticking with Turbo C, however; it is free, and you seem 
> to be set up for it.

Well, by "set up for it" I've downloaded a copy and ran it in DOSEMU. I
also have some experience with it, having used it years ago.  But, I
don't know if it is right for an embedded project.  Are there any
licensing issues to worry about or any rot like that?  I liked the idea
of using FreeDOS/RxDOS and the ELKS C library because there were no
restrictions on any of them besides the *GPL ones of needing to make the
source code available to end users.  I'm not sure what using a
proprietary C library would get me into.  I think with the two compilers
you mentioned, I should be safe though.

thanks!

-- 
Ryan Underwood, <nemesis@icequake.net>

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]