[Simh] A new version...

[Philipp Hachtmann]

Ok, folks,

what shall I say? I'm getting frustrated. Spent nearly two days with the 
  Makefile and a suitable basic readline support...
Yes, Improvements are bad. Dangerous. Political incorrect. Sorry.


>>>> I was surprised that the new
>>>> make is much faster than using the stock makefile.
>>> Didn't I tell?
>> Yes.. it's true.. but speed of compile matters only if
>> developing for simh, and only if recompiling the whole
>> thing.

Speed and flexibility. The Makefile is very flexible by the means
of changing settings and rebuilding parts. The speed gain is the highest 
when NOT compiling all the stuff!


> If you never compile you don't need a makefile.

:-)


>> So for these folks it's a good thing! ... it would really
>> aggrevate me if I got to that step and it no longer
>> worked, so that's why I felt compelled to speak up
>> about the wisdom of leaving the default makefile alone.
>> Because it works. Not everyone has a fancy computer,

I thought SIMH is a program that should simulate fancy computers on
uninteresting modern PC scrap. And PC scrap loves Linux and GNU make.
But I've been wrong: SIMH itself seems to be a historic thing. I'm a bit 
frustrated about that fact.

> This is completely irrelevant to whether the Makefile should be  
> designed correctly or not.

Thank you!

> Of course any new Makefile must be TESTED and must WORK.

100% agree. It has to be well tested.


>> and frankly I see far more troubles reported by those
>> with the latest and greatest than with modest hardware.
>> Soon I need to get a new machine, and I dread it.

GNU make, libreadline and a useful Makefile are definitively NOT the 
"latest and greatest".


I am done for the first. Latest version of my readline enhancements and 
the makefile on http://hachti.de/simh

BTW, it could build on Windows now. There was a little problem with a 
long (!!) argument list...


Good night,
Philipp

-- 
http://www.hachti.de