- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Stephen C. Daukas

At 11:50 PM 4/16/2001 -0400, Tom Guilderson wrote: [... lots of good stuff ...] > > Also, are there any tools or compilers for Pascal? Remember, the > Delphi folks > > understand Pascal, and I'm sure they will ask this question. (It has > been 20 > > years since I programmed anything in Pascal...). I'll admit that this isn't much of a sample, but the three folks I know that actually use the product are proficient in C/C++ as well as Pascal, so you may not have much of an issue. >I won't proceed to thrash pascal since I have never really done any >development in pascal, but the linux/unix development world is dominated >by C. If it is not written in C, then the interpreter, byte code >interpreter/virtaul machine for the language was likely written in C >(perl, tcl/tk, python, java etc etc). C is also the language that gives >you the best interfaces for system calls into the low level aspects of >unix such as the file systems, I/O etc. If you are going to do any >serious development in a Unix environment, you will need to know C. Kylix is both Pascal and C++. Pascal is being released first, with C++ not far behind. Kylix will also allow you to move your stuff from Windoze to Linux with apparent ease. For more reading, here is an interesting article I found in my archives. I'll try to find a more recent reference... http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-01-31-001-27-OP-CY-SW

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Tom Guilderson

Andy Stewart wrote: > > HI gang, > > I am starting to write up the last 1/3 of my presentation to the Delphi > Developers group, and its the section on developer tools and utilities. I'd > like some input from you folks as to what I should include in this section. > > Emacs - the original "IDE" (???) > gdb for debugging (nicer with DDD front end, IMHO) > make and Makefiles > gcc Emacs - yes - is there any other editor? Hey it even runs on VOS! I don'tneed no stinking fully blown ide visual xyz gcc, g++ - yes make - yes (for smaler projects) gdb - absolutely (you need a debugger!) haven't used ddd since i usually invoke gdb from the command line. sometimes (gdb) attach pid - to debug a running daemon process. > What else do "real" Linux developers use? Maybe I'm suffering a brain cramp > this evening, but your input will help. cvs (or maybe rcs) for source code version control autoconf, automake, and libtool for larger projects when make alone becomes too cumbersome (more than 9 or 10 files or multiple target systems) bison and flex (yacc and lex in the commercial SysV world) POSIX pthread library for multithreading (portable accross SysV, BSD, Linux, and if done carefully NT since it is posix compliant when the posix subsystem is enabled) also because the real world is asynchronous. m4 for macro processing strace on linux, truss (prefer over strace) on SysV and BSD (heard that a port for linux is being planned) patch and diff sed, awk, grep and all the other shell scripting tools perl - something will need it eventually (Not my favorite, but very powerful. Also not all perl programs need be impossible to figure out with purposefuuly ugly syntax and formatting) tcl/tk (not as much now that I am learning to use python for those quick and dirty gui tools) python 2.0 For java switch back and forth between IBM and Sun JDK - lean more to IBM. for HTML editing switch around between emacs, amaya (W3C), and bluefish depending on mood For dynamic web pages PHP (we have a tomcat, apache JSP), server we are playing with at work) also there are so many useful things already done in perl, you can just use with almost no effort. Don't forget about libraries available for doing many common tasks such as GTK and Qt for creating GUI interfaces (if you have used Xlib primitives you quickly appreciate libraries like GTK which save time) libz for compressing and uncompressing image and mime handling libraries etc. libwww from W3C for client side http stuff (good for crawlers) There have got to be lots of other development related tools like code warrior, kdevelop (i actually like the kwrite editor that comes with KDE), > Also, are there any tools or compilers for Pascal? Remember, the Delphi folks > understand Pascal, and I'm sure they will ask this question. (It has been 20 > years since I programmed anything in Pascal...). I won't proceed to thrash pascal since I have never really done any development in pascal, but the linux/unix development world is dominated by C. If it is not written in C, then the interpreter, byte code interpreter/virtaul machine for the language was likely written in C (perl, tcl/tk, python, java etc etc). C is also the language that gives you the best interfaces for system calls into the low level aspects of unix such as the file systems, I/O etc. If you are going to do any serious development in a Unix environment, you will need to know C.

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Brian J. Conway

My earlier statement was merely a point on RedHat's previous _shaky_ release. I've been using Mandrake's gcc-2.96 recompiled on 7.2 out of Cooker for months and it's an excellent compiler (hell, Cooker's been compiled by it for 4 months now), and I would recommend it to anyone. > Read slashdot for rebuttal. I read Slashdot for my daily dose of trolls and goatsex links, but WLUG is not the place to comment on that one. -b

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Dennis Payne

> What else do "real" Linux developers use? strace grep ldd nm I don't think they would be useful and helpful to demonstrate. Frankly the best tool is bash. The automation of all the stupid little things you need to prep data or whatever is incredibly useful. (It is why the GNU tools are requirement to make NT useful IMHO.) > Also, are there any tools or compilers for Pascal? www.freepascal.org They have been building a Turbo Pascal/Delphi compiler for Linux, Dos, etc. (Used it once to build an old Turbo Pascal program.) Dennis Payne dulsi(a)identicalsoftware.com

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Dennis Payne

> And the cool thing is, it doesn't matter that they shipped an > incompatible, broken compiler Read slashdot for rebuttal. > since /usr/include/asm and /linux > are includes for the kernel that glibc is built against and not the > current kernel, you can't compile modules that are compatible with your > current kernel anyways! Actually from the slashdot article it sounds like they are using linux 2.4 so the includes are correct. Dennis Payne dulsi(a)identicalsoftware.com

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Doug Chamberlin

At 4/16/2001 11:50 AM (Monday), Scott Venier wrote: >You might also want to mention codewarrior. http://www.metrowerks.com >Nice and pretty for those folks who grew up developing on macos or >windows. You might keep in mind that the Delphi Developers Group is made up of developers who are 99% likely to use Kylix for development. Therefore, they won't be much interested in alternative development environments. However, they WILL be interested in auxiliary tools which are considered essential to managing applications on Linux not matter what the original language the app is written in. I would put the rpm and other packaging/installing tools in this category. P.S. I think Kylix includes a debugger. If it is as good as the one Borland has for the Win32 platform then it is all these developers will be using.

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Frank Sweetser

On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 06:57:49PM -0400, Brian J. Conway wrote: > > Red Hat 7.1, based on the Linux 2.4 kernel, is out as of 10:00am this > > morning. I have a mirror of i386 disc1 and disc2 ISO's and the full FTP > > install tree if anyone wants it. > > And the cool thing is, it doesn't matter that they shipped an > incompatible, broken compiler, because since /usr/include/asm and /linux > are includes for the kernel that glibc is built against and not the > current kernel, you can't compile modules that are compatible with your > current kernel anyways! On a serious note, I don't suppose anyone knows Actually, the kernel team (linus in particular) has been screaming bloody murder that the distro's do this for at least two years now. If you're compiling user space, you're running against user space (glibc) so that's what you care about being compatible with, not the kernel. If you're compiling kernel mods, you should be compiling with -I/usr/src/linux-2.4/ (or wherever you keep your kernel source). -- Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 15 Full-time WPI Network Tech, Part time Linux/Perl guy | There are still some other things to do, so don't think if I didn't fix your favorite bug that your bug report is in the bit bucket. (It may be, but don't think it. :-) Larry Wall in <7238(a)jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Brian J. Conway

> Red Hat 7.1, based on the Linux 2.4 kernel, is out as of 10:00am this > morning. I have a mirror of i386 disc1 and disc2 ISO's and the full FTP > install tree if anyone wants it. And the cool thing is, it doesn't matter that they shipped an incompatible, broken compiler, because since /usr/include/asm and /linux are includes for the kernel that glibc is built against and not the current kernel, you can't compile modules that are compatible with your current kernel anyways! On a serious note, I don't suppose anyone knows when we can expect to see 7.1 for Alpha out? Sadly, it's still the best bet of the distros out there for running on a Multia. Brian J. Conway dogbert(a)clue4all.net Geek for hire: http://clue4all.net/resume Men may control the free world, but women control the boobs. (http://www.pvponline.com/archive.php3?archive=20001024)

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Andy Stewart

>Keith Wright wrote: > > > From: Andy Stewart <andystewart(a)mediaone.net> > > > > I am starting to write up the last 1/3 of my presentation to the Delphi > > Developers group, and its the section on developer tools and utilities. I'd > > like some input from you folks as to what I should include in this section. > > > > Emacs - the original "IDE" (???) > > What are those questions marks for? Of course Emacs. I definitely want to include Emacs. My question marks were for the comment about whether or not emacs could be considereed the original "IDE". No big deal...it was an editorial comment, anyway. Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder -o) | The sooner you make your first 5000 Worcester Linux Users' Group /\ | mistakes, the sooner you will be able to Worcester, MA, USA _\_v | correct them. -- Nicolaides http://www.wlug.org |

April 16, 2001

Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Charles R. Anderson

Red Hat 7.1, based on the Linux 2.4 kernel, is out as of 10:00am this morning. I have a mirror of i386 disc1 and disc2 ISO's and the full FTP install tree if anyone wants it. FTP install/upgrade boot image: ftp://angus.ind.wpi.edu/pub/mirrors/redhat/linux/7.1/en/os/i386/images/boot… Server: angus.ind.wpi.edu Directory: /pub/mirrors/redhat/linux/7.1/en/os/i386 ISO download: ftp://angus.ind.wpi.edu/pub/mirrors/redhat/linux/7.1/en/iso/i386 Have fun! Charles R. Anderson cra(a)wpi.edu Network Engineer (508) 831-6110 Computing and Communications Center (508) 831-5115 Worcester Polytechnic Institute Fax (508) 831-5483

April 16, 2001