[gccsdk] Further ArcEm development (or not)

Peter Naulls peter at chocky.org
Wed Oct 7 08:21:05 PDT 2009


Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
>> The ArcEm CVS has been static for quite some time.
> 
> Last change 2009-09-25?

Sorry yes.  "cvs log" does things in a unhelpful order.  I've been
using SVN too long.  Do you have any specific plans for ArcEm here?

My biggest frustration with RPCEmu is still the issue of RONs. 
Obviously these have been endlessly distributed, but finding a precise
owner who could then give permission for distribution may be
impossible.  The ownership of 3.1 is probably hopelessly murky.  At
least with RPC and RO5 there's some clarity, even if the IOMD version
is still incomplete.

>> The last post to the ArcEm mailing list is more recent, but still over
>> a year ago.  In any case, Arculator
>> (http://b-em.bbcmicro.com/arculator/) is probably a superior emulator.
>> However, what I don't want to happen is for it to be lost/forgotten
>> just because there's no interest right now.  I think we presently have
>> a danger of that with some RISC OS material.
> 
> Yes, with some RO stuff, particularly that on user's own individual
> sites where they drift away, change ISPs, etc.

I think especially so with stuff related to Archimedes.  There's
something of a community of BBC users, so that's no in danger, and
there's plenty of interest still in RiscPC onwards, but the gap
in the middle doesn't seem entirely well catered to.  Probably because
there's not a great deal of current interest in the matter.

There are other Archimedes emulators that seem to have vanished for
example.

   The
> mailing lists work fine and have a decent archive interface on
> mail-archive.com.  (sf.net's is awful.)  Why break all those ties?  I
> don't see any benefits.

In fairness, the ArcEm mailing list isn't really used any more. The
argument could be make for combining its traffic with that of RPCEmu.

> riscos.info's wiki already links to arcem.sf.net, perhaps a page for it
> is all that's needed if you're concerned about it being forgotten?

Perhaps.  Presently under consideration is a better definition of
riscos.info exact scope with regards to machines it might cover.
The focus has always been RiscPC+RO4 or later, but in light of
my concerns about, that could change.







More information about the gcc mailing list