Re: MINT

[Alan Hourihane]

On Mon, 2008-12-22 at 11:48 +0100, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Alan Hourihane wrote:
> > > > I have more patches to gnulib for MINT. Shall I just file them as bugs ?
> > > 
> > > It depends how serious MINT as a platform is. What is MINT at all? Why 
> > > does
> > > it lack basic functions like mbrtowc, standardized in ANSI C Amendment 1?
> > 
> > MINT runs on the Atari ST.
> 
> Oh, you mean MiNT? I used this in 1990-1992. Definitely a museum system by 
> now.

Right.

> > You can google FreeMiNT. 
> 
> http://freemint.de/ - last update of the software 5.7 years ago...

That site is old, and doesn't reflect the current state.

> > > Is this platform in active development? If so, it might be easier to add 
> > > the
> > > missing functions or fix the bugs that might be uncovered by gnulib's 
> > > tests.
> > 
> > There's only a handful of developers with minimal time.
> 
> In this situation, you cannot expect commitment from gnulib. You can, of
> course, report problems that you find. But I will give priority to issues
> found with recent Unix version and mingw. And I have ca. 25 such issues
> pending.

The only commitment I'm asking from gnulib is to apply patches that we
submit. They'll be #ifdef __MINT__ anyway, isn't that acceptable ??

> Problems that you should report in any case, however, are problems in the
> module description: missing source files, missing dependencies, or errors
> signalled by 'autoconf' while creating the configure file.

Alan.