PB and Linux?!

[Martin Kropfinger]

I know that this is no question for in this forum, but it's the
same with the other forums.
Because I've changed to Linux I'd like to know if there is, or
will be a versin of PowerBasic for Linux/Unix.
Or if not, and I fear that this is the fact, if there is an
other way, an other compiler. Or do I really have to leave a
partition for DOS?
Because of Linux was and still is an developer platform there
should be a Linux version I think....

Thanx
Martin

------------------

[Lance Edmonds]

Hi Martin, yes we are working on a PowerBASIC compiler for Linux, but it is not yet completed. PowerBASIC operate a no-vaporware policy that precludes announcing shipping dates before the product is ready to ship. You can bet that when it is ready, we'll be announcing it with plenty of fanfare!

Thanks for asking!



------------------
Lance
PowerBASIC Support
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>

[Richard L Bianchi]

SoftWindows is a discontinued product for unix, ie: SUN Solairs,
I don't think there is a market for a unix version of any of
PowerBasic products, and don't know what the cost would be,
but I'd sell my car and walk the seven miles to work to
compile PowerBasic on unix....
-Rick

------------------

[David J Walker]

Right On Rick!

------------------

[Amos Vryhof]

I can see plenty use for PowerBASIC for Linux....something in
between PB/DOS, and PB/CC....which could for example run direct
ports of DOS programs with little modification (I would LOVE that)
or, use PowerBASIC calls to use the Linux TCP/IP stack or something.

Remember, even with the wide availability of X, and other GUI shells
for Linux, many of its most popular programs are console-based.

Linux without X is also extremely useful for Embedded applications.
Having built-in support for Sound Cards, video Adaptors, and
numerous Network protocols gives Linux the embedded app advantage
over DOS for enterprise-level solutions.

Personally...I would just like to port sCon to linux so I dont
have to remember linux commands....a DOS Shell for Linux...
kinda like Bash for DOS....

Anyway....imagine code similar to:

PORT%=80 'HTTP Port
OPEN TCP port% for output as #1 'Send info to port
print #1, "Content-type: text/html" 'Set the Doctype (like a CGI)

open "index.html" for input as #2 'Open an HTML file

do until eof(2) 'loop to the end of the file
line input #2, a$ 'grab a line
print #1, a$ 'send it out via HTTP
loop
close
close

With routines like that, a PowerBASIC web server would be easy
for anyone to write. (you would need to accept connections and
such, but it would be trivial.)

That is my argument for why PB would be great for Linux.

Amos http://projects.dosos.com/


------------------
Amos

[David Venable]

I can't tell you guys how happy I am to learn of a power basic
compiler for linux! However, in the mean time, if you really
need a linux basic compiler there are two that I know of:

Rapid-Q - free, object-oriented Linux/BSD/Windows GUI/console
compiler. It actually compiles to bytecode and
includes the interpreter in the executable, but it's
still really cool.
http://www.basicguru.com/rapidq/

XBasic - free, open source, Linux/Windows GUI/console compiler.
This is a true compiler.
http://www.xbasic.org/

------------------

[David Venable]

A couple of questions about the future linux compiler (hopefully
this will not violate the vaporware policy, but if so, then here
are a couple of things to consider):

* Will it compile to object files so that I can link PB modules
to C modules with gcc? (this would be EXTREMELY nice, it would
also be nice if the DOS compiler did this)

* Will it support GTK and KDE, or even Xlib? Or will there be
a separate GUI compiler? (I know that I would prefer it just be
one compiler)


------------------

[Wayne Diamond]

I just gave XBasic a run, it's interesting... has the most horrid interface I've ever seen too, but you dont need to use it. It churns xbasic .x source into spasm-compatible .asm, which then compiles to a 'true exe' with nmake (hello world weighed in @ 17k). But with one catch - it requires 1.5mb xb.dll runtime lib! Not sure if it requires a runtime of sorts for 'nix...


------------------

[Tom Hanlin]

All we can tell you about the Linux version of PowerBASIC is, it's in development, and it's a PB/CC-style compiler.

------------------
Tom Hanlin
PowerBASIC Staff

[Buzzed Mobile]

Ok, now I need someone to help me get my tounge back in my mouth. It's started to scrape the floor - PB on NIX - all I can say is wow!! - Itl be like having a perl compiler!!!

[Lance Edmonds]

Mr Mobile, thank you for the encouragement.

However, I do have to draw your attention to the rules of this BBS - we do not permit the use of aliases and/or handles... please reregister with your first and last names before posting further messages.

Thanks!


------------------
Lance
PowerBASIC Support
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>

[Alan Jones]

Ooops…

Absolutely - I deserves a good floggin’ for that guvnor’ I surely duz... Me wiv 2 logins an ’ forgettin both me passwords an all... I says its all down to the system for reminding me about the wrong’un. Never the less, I knows me place, so I’ll just nip off an’ boil me ed in oil for a few minutes. Should remine me not to do it again…

Alan (The Pox-ridden) Jones
Head turnip counter.




------------------
Alan Jones
[email protected]
www.Buzzed.co.uk

[Gary Russell]

It is a good ideal to get on the Linux bane wangon. Linux has a ways to
go, but it will get there. If you can give it as god an interface
as the DOS GUI you will do wall. As Linux is a little short on
programming interfases.



------------------

[Wayne Diamond]

Can somebody (preferably someone who has used PB's upcoming 'nix compiler) tell me what a good brand/flavour of linux is to go for? Im getting a new workstation soon and will be putting aside a drive for linux simply to get ready for the compiler, regardless of when it'll be released as I want to get up to speed on linux anyway but it'll make things easier if the linux I get is the same one the PB compiler was built on. Answer me this and I wont ask any more questions about PB for linux until it's released


------------------

[Tom Hanlin]

Shouldn't much matter which version, Wayne. That's part of the point of the "console" approach.


------------------
Tom Hanlin
PowerBASIC Staff

[Mel Bishop]

Ya'll might wanna consider buying coffee stock. If possible, just
before the release. I forsee those poor schmucks at PB help getting
dumped on with questions.


------------------

[Wayne Diamond]

Tom, thats great to hear that it should work on all linuxes, im also happy that it's only a console compiler not a GUI one! (I just might have a chance afterall)
Mel, keep an eye on the share price of Coca Cola after PB for 'nix is released
Hmm RedHat looks good, Ill start with that...


------------------

[Tom Hanlin]

"All" versions may be a bit optimistic but, yes, Red Hat is a good place to start.

------------------
Tom Hanlin
PowerBASIC Staff

[Wayne Diamond]

Sorry, changed my mind - ive ordered Slackware Linux 8.0 ... (because I read somewhere that it was the Linux for diehards ), US$49 is sensationably reasonable for 7 CDs worth of operating system + pretty accessories
Now go on, now that I've placed my order and handed over money for Slackware, tell me that PB-4-nix wont work on it - its been one of those weeks...
Thanks again Tom, I won't be asking anything anything more about PB-4-nix until after it has been released, at which time prepare to be absolutely hammered with support requests. *raises glass* Cheers!


------------------

[Michael Torrie]

If PB/Linux can compile to standard object files (C-style .o, since pb is not oo), and can make direct calls to any c library or system call, then I am very interested. If not, then it's still useful, but not for me. I'm sure that the PB crew is already aware of all the issues, but I bring them up for those who will be wanting to purchase pb/linux (which has been in the works for over 2 years !!). If the pb/linux compiler can produce standard .o code and standard debugging information, then we can leverage existing tools like gdb and have a great development platform. Another useful tool to bundle would be a .h to basic translator so I could use any C library and any C header file. Imagine writing GTK+ gui apps in Powerbasic!! Cool. (That's the beauty of linux; all apps are really console apps, although you can hide the console (run them straight from the gui). It's much cleaner than windows that's for sure.)

I would like to see some specs on the project now, though, such as if it will generate .o files, can it link against and use any standard c library, and can my usual linux tools work such as gdb.

If there is a beta test program, I and many here would definitely be interested in helping out how we can.

Michael


------------------