Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:14163 comp.os.386bsd.misc:3911
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!yeshua.marcam.com!uunet!heifetz.msen.com!zib-berlin.de!irz401!uriah.sax.de!not-for-mail
From: j@uriah.sax.de (J Wunsch)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: How UTTERLY Amazing! (Was Re: FreeBSD vs NetBSD)
Date: 1 Nov 1994 18:46:40 +0100
Organization: Private U**X site; member IN e.V.
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <395uu0INNp5l@bonnie.sax.de>
References: <358o3g$p95@umd5.umd.edu> <37hfa2$8mt@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <BLYMN.94Oct19193600@mallee.awadi.com.au> <38h8d5$e19@CSOS.ORST.EDU> <38hk8s$dn2@orion.cc.andrews.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bonnie.sax.de
gillham@andrews.edu (Andrew Gillham) writes:
>>It goes like this:
>>
>>DOS *has* an integrated development environment.
>>UNIX *is* an integrated development environment.
>It depends on your point of view. ...
vi-gcc-vi-gcc-gdb-vi-..... cycle vs. Emacs
Btw., i don't see your problem with the Emacs IDE. It's better than
a pre-cooked one since it's more flexible. (Of course, for ease of
use, you should bind `compile' and `gdb' to some F-key.)
Well, it does still use `make'. But make is far more powerful than
anything i've seen under messydos (except make, of course:).
>Anyway, that's just my opinion! Now if I could cram the gcc &
>emacs code together into a slick UNIX ide.... Then I'd be happy
>with unix development vs DOS development.
If this is all your concern: use crunchit!, and make a big binary
out of it! :--)
--
cheers, J"org work: joerg_wunsch@tcd-dresden.de
private: joerg_wunsch@uriah.sax.de
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources from. ;-)