Bob Jones wrote in a message to Roy J. Tellason:

 RJT> Bob Jones wrote in a message to Wes Garland:

 BJ> Thanks for the work and info!  You finally have pulled something
 BJ> together.  I tried to a few months back but didn't get anyone who
 BJ> was interested.

 RJT> Now waitaminnit,  there.  Some of us were *very* interested,  
 RJT> just not in a position to be able to offer much in the way of 
 RJT> help...

 BJ> True, some were interested in the port, but no one else was able to
 BJ> help out with the code or the issues I was having.  Now we have
 BJ> three others (maybe more) plus my self willing to work on the code.
 BJ> We're finally getting a critical mass together to get things moving
 BJ> forward.  Unfortunately, maintaining the code across existing
 BJ> platforms may suffer short term.

Well,  my dos version still works,  here.  Mostly.  I actually don't use a
whole lot of what's in there,  particularly the stuff that got added v3
onwards,  the extra languages and whatnot.  I think that most of what I use
is a few keys,  and that's about it,  and they're not even particularly
essential to what I'm doing here.

 BJ> Longer term, I expect the Linux / Unix port to also compile and 
 BJ> run under OS/2 using the EMX GNU C compiler, and probably similar 
 BJ> for Win32.  Yes, this stradegy will probably mean the dropping of 
 BJ> plain DOS support in future versions.

But the dos version I have still works.  

 BJ> But I believe we now have the critical mass of software developers
 BJ> to get things moving.

It sure is looking like it.

 BJ> The stradegy I was taking wasn't working. The other three took a 
 BJ> stradegy I was considering, but was holding off on while trying to 
 BJ> get a different way of handling the code working.....

 BJ> Any way, thanks for the note....

Sure.  I just wanted to emphasize that there _is_ interest in running max
under linux out here.

---