Re: App database, libsynth

[Stas Sergeev <stsp@aknet.ru>]

Hello.

Bart Oldeman wrote:
> I just keep wondering about the FM devices. The DOSBOX 
> people seem to have been able to get that working, so 
> what is special about DOSBOX that is so difficult in 
> DOSEMU?
AFAIK dosbox people are using an SDL lib for
output, while we are using an OSS directly
and are going to write more plugins.
I wish dosemu to use SDL, pthreads and all
the other tasty things, but it just doesn't.
So for us it will require significantly more
work than for them to add an Adlib.

> http://www.happypenguin.org/show?DOSbox 
> http://www.happypenguin.org/show?DOSbox&start=10
Wery interesting indeed!
Well, after all I can understand their reasons:
they are comparing 1.0.2 most likely, as a last
"very stable" version and this is understandable
after all.
Also some people claim dosemu crashes their system
even without being root. It is no longer possible
since linux-2.4.20, but they haven't specified the
kernel they used, so they blame dosemu instead.
Configuring dosemu is now trivial, but again, they
were comparing against 1.0...
So probably that was not a FUD, but rather a
consequence of the fact that dosemu had recently
celebrated its first decade of existance, but there
is still no a version that is both really and officially
stable. But that can be changed eventually.

>> > but the complete removal of coopthreads will
>> > require also removing comcom.com, so the
>> > coopthreads is still there. 
>  just to clarify, it's still there but it's dead code as long as you 
>  don't use comcom. Before it was always initialized.
Unfortunately that makes no difference at all: the
coopthreads/qemu problem was triggering only when
comcom or "unix -e" was used. Now "unix -e" is safe,
but comcom, still being a default, keeps the problem
exactly where it was. Initialisation of coopthreads
didnt raised the problem and even using a builtins was
possible.
But I accept the fact that freecom needs some work
before it can be used.