EB>> I'm running Watcom v10.0a very satisfactorily in 8 megs, WITH the
 EB>> WPS.
 
 PC> Good to hear that, I guess it can't be much worse than emx/gnu. :-)

 hl> Whadyamean, worse?  EMX may not be a speed daemon, but it doesn't eat
 hl> too much VM either.  It works even on my old 8MB 386DX-25, with 10MB
 hl> free on the 26MB swap partition:-)  Not enough disk space to even
 hl> install something else, I guess, let alone run it.  (OK, I'll admit: I
 hl> only hack pure C:-)  And it's nice to your code too.  Only things it
 hl> lacks are toolkit stuff like resource editors, ipf compilers and
 hl> reference material. 
 hl> regards,

I don't have anything to compare it to (except Borland Turbo C/C++ v3.0 for
DOS), so I really don't know.  It does seem to take less space than Watcom.

I saw a message (Mike Bilow, I think) that Watcom takes 200+ megs for a
typical installation.  

emx/gcc takes about 8 minutes to compile my entire program I'm writing, a
native OS/2 32-bit multi-threaded text mode terminal program. :-)

Using the -pipe option with GCC.EXE is supposed to speed up compiling, I
haven't really checked it to see if its faster than without, yet.

Anyway, I think emx/gcc is great!  But as I understand, anything that I
write with it, I must make the source code available if I distribute it?

Phil


--- Blue Wave/Max v2.20l OS2 Beta