Board index » kylix » Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Re: Kylix now officialy dead?


2004-11-09 03:49:37 PM
kylix0
Andreas Hausladen wrote:
Quote
>Yes. RE-generate. But generating the first iteration must have been
>'painfull'...

Yes it was painfull because there was no tool that generated the code. But
now I have that tool and it is also able to generate bindings for
wxWidgets except that fact that doxygen generates trash for the wxWidgets
header files.
But in theory....
Quote
Yes, it would be nice to have another layer (Linux guys love software
layers: glibc+X+Qt+KDELib ) but for what price?
At this moment? I agree that that would not be possible. In fact, that
chance might have been gone. I think somebody should have realized the
necessity for another layer at the time CLX was made :-(
--
Ruurd
 
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Simon Kissel wrote:
Quote
If you are a Linux developer, who wants to develop only under Linux
and for Linux, forget about Kylix. Most "real Linux geeks" don't want
RAD, but {*word*155} low-level c. Near all of them don't want to work
with closed-source software, and even less want to pay money for
software. That's the reality Borland has faced when trying to sell
Kylix.
I think you mistake about "less want to pay money for software".
Why Linux people does not like closed source? Most likely end-user
never use source of products he use on Linux. So why they needed
sources?
From my personal expirience sources needed to recompile product and
adopt it to current runtime environment. Without having a sources it is
technically difficult to solve inter-environment issues. Even close but
different versions of GNU compilers has compatibility problems.
Currently i'm writing stuff that should run on MDK 8.2,9.2,10.2. This
result in using three g++ compilers 2.96, 3.0, 3.2. Without sources it
is difficult to produce single flawless solution.
So the one path for closed source developer is to maintain binaries
working all available (and actively used by people) distros and pray
that it will work on other. Without this, product quickly suffer from
stream of bugs and incompatibilites. Exactly what happened with Kylix.
Think why people buy, for example, Oracle and VMWare? They both
close-sourced apps. Just because they work without problems, they
updated and maintained on regular basis.
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Simon Kissel wrote:
Quote
I can only speak of the big linux applications I use myself. That
being said I have to admit those are mostly server-side stuff. And
the Linux die-hard guys I personally know all only use VI for
everything.
I'm work in the company full of {*word*155} linux developers. Those who
use vi actually orthodoxes. Most of our developers use EMACS for
development because it has many features and joe or mcedit for
everything else because of it's simple and straight keymapping. It is
not rare case when one complain: "Damn! vi again! Guys, who remember
how to quit from this?" ;-)
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Hi Ruurd,
Quote
>My personal hope is that Borland will integrate everything needed to build
>Linux applications into the Delphi IDE.

LOL. Seeing an onslaught of programs totally unsuitable for Linux.
But you don't need to run it on Linux: only deploy on Linux. I'm quite
happy using Delphi 7 for CLX development (on Windows) and then using
CrossKylix to recompile as a Linux target...
Linux only needed when deploying - not on my desktop ;-)
Quote
Ruurd
Groetjes,
Bob Swart (aka Dr.Bob - www.DrBob42.com)
--
Bob Swart Training & Consultancy (eBob42) Borland Technology Partner
Delphi Win32 & .NET training en support - IntraWeb Authorized Trainer
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Bob Swart wrote:
Quote
>>My personal hope is that Borland will integrate everything needed to
>>build Linux applications into the Delphi IDE.
>
>LOL. Seeing an onslaught of programs totally unsuitable for Linux.

But you don't need to run it on Linux: only deploy on Linux. I'm quite
happy using Delphi 7 for CLX development (on Windows) and then using
CrossKylix to recompile as a Linux target...
True and false. You know as well as I do that the devil is in the
details :-) For example, the placement of property files in
respectively /etc and dotdirectories, the placement of shared resources,
pesky little things as the naming of shared objects, just to name a few.
Developing and testing on Windows and successfully deploying on Linux
without retesting works only in (IMHO) the minority of cases.
--
Ruurd
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Hi Ruurd,
Quote
Developing and testing on Windows and successfully deploying on Linux
without retesting works only in (IMHO) the minority of cases.
I never said I didn't need to test on Linux - I still do. But I don't
need to run an IDE on Linux to do the testing...
For me, Windows is the development and testing platform (with Delphi),
and Linux the deployment and testing platform. A remote de{*word*81} might
help (one that can run with one part in the Delphi IDE and the remote
part on Linux, hosting my Linux app), but that may be asking too much...
Still, it works for me.
Quote
Ruurd
Groetjes,
Bob Swart (aka Dr.Bob - www.DrBob42.com)
--
Bob Swart Training & Consultancy (eBob42) Borland Technology Partner
Delphi Win32 & .NET training en support - IntraWeb Authorized Trainer
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Quote
For me, Windows is the development and testing platform (with Delphi),
and Linux the deployment and testing platform. A remote de{*word*81} might
help (one that can run with one part in the Delphi IDE and the remote
part on Linux, hosting my Linux app), but that may be asking too much...
I'm about to start writing a remote de{*word*81} for CrossKylix. First beta
tests hopefully will start at the end of November.
Simon
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

On 2004-11-08, Mike Mader < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
Feel free to google for all glibc and kernel bug reports coming from Borland
while developing Kylix. You'll see what kind of support they got from the
Linux community. Mostly "we don't care about a commercial vendor" kind of
reponses. Now have a look how well other vendors of closed source
application
or objects are doing. They all suffer from the same fate: The Linux
community
expects that everyone will rebuild all their applications for every release
of glibc and the various libraries. Look 7 threads above to see how an
obviously untested glibc2.3.4 release in gentoo recently caused ALL closed-
software out there break.
I agree. That Gentoo one breaks FPC too btw, due to FPC having own startup
code, and the base RTL not needing libc.
It is not only the commercial vendors that suffer from the glibc problems.
Nearly all projects not following the most simple autoconf-gcc path have
problems with this, and binary glibc compability is an exception rather than
a rule, even across versions of the same distro.
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

On 2004-11-09, Andreas Hausladen < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
R.F. Pels wrote:

>Yes. RE-generate. But generating the first iteration must have been
>'painfull'...

Yes it was painfull because there was no tool that generated the code. But
now I have that tool and it is also able to generate bindings for
wxWidgets except that fact that doxygen generates trash for the wxWidgets
header files.


>However, what is your take on the other things I posed? I'm interested in
>what your take is on them...

Yes, it would be nice to have another layer (Linux guys love software
layers: glibc+X+Qt+KDELib ) but for what price?
Roughly the same as
User32+gdi32+comctrl+explorer/iexplore etc?
Just that Windows doesn't regard the layers as separate packages doesn't mean they are not there.
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Arthur Hoornweg < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:<418f4f1f$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >...
Quote
A sad day. Delphi 2005 will have no more CLX support or
so I've heard.

So any future Kylix version will no more have the "platform
independence" feature because you can't recompile a Kylix
source under Delphi or vice versa.

So guys, it looks like Kylix is dead...
How Kylix SHOULD have been built and marketed:
Basically if Kylix is dead I think it died for two reasons.
1. The problems with deploying both QT licensed edition and QT Free
eddition based apps on a single computer using a special Borland built
version of Licensed QT. (Rather {*word*193} work arounds like launch scropts
had to be used to deploy apps with this system.
2. Marketing it primarily as a Windows Software porting tool.
Kylix visual componants in my opinon should have been built on the GTK
library
despite its GNOMEish looks even on KDE for the folowing reasons.
GTK has a proprietary software friendly licensing policy (LGPL. For
you Free Software fanatics out there you have to remember Boralnd want
to make Kylix so it could be used for both Free And Closed software.)
There would have to have been NO fancy negotiations with TrollTech
which to this day I still think is the reason for puting the "Personal
Use Only" licenses on entry level products and raising the prices of
Professional and Enterprise products to be even higher than Micro$ofts
if GTK was the Library used for CLX.
This one is on a purely technical note and not one of my usual rants
on this subject. I believe that GTK would have been a better Library
to base CLX on precicely because of its streight C procedural
structure. This would have much better attuned to the single
inheritance OOP structure of Object Pascal than the C++ based QT with
its multiple enheritance, MOC dependence and other incapabilities with
the Object Pascal language.
GTK is automatically available in virtually all Linux Distros. (at
least the ones that include NGU Cash, The GNUmeric Spreadsheat and the
GIMP image processing app. In fact the later app was what GTK was
originally designed for.
There would have been NONE of the dependency and deployment issues
currently plaguing the would be distributors of Kylix/CLX apps now if
GTK were the library of choice for them rather than QT/2.
In the marketing area however is where I think the BIGGEST goofs were
made with Kylix. Kylix should have never been promoted as a simple
Windows porting tool. People who wanted Kylix were looking for a
Visual Basic clone but that one that compiled fully native apps in a
language like PowerBASIC or Object Pascal. Borland should have kept
their ORIGINAL pricing structure. $90.00 for an Entry Level Standard
Version that could be used to develop BOTH Free and Closed Commercial
software. (Again this was possible with the Proprietary software
friendly LGPLed GTK but NOT with the proprietary QT.) $300.00 for the
professional version and $900.00 for the Enterprise version. The entry
level version should have been marketed as THE Visual Basic equivalant
for Linux. It would have sold like hotcakes and established the
Proffessional and Enterprise versions of the product better with
larger businesses.
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

== Ursprüngliche Mitteilung von "Simon Kissel" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >am
8.11.04 13:16
Quote
c) A remote de{*word*81}.
I suppose Delphi 2005 has a remote de{*word*81}.
So the frontend is there and (provided we have the appropriate
compiler/linker/libraries) just the Linux debug runtime is needed to be
added to have a full "remote IDE". OK it's a sacrilege to use Windows to
develop for Linux, but that is the Borland way....
-Michael
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Quote
Feel free to google for all glibc and kernel bug reports coming from Borland
while developing Kylix. You'll see what kind of support they got from the
Linux community. Mostly "we don't care about a commercial vendor" kind of
reponses.
Sound _very_ silly. _Any_ bug report is valuable, as it might improve the
software !
Now with Novell/Suse supporting the Mono project I suppose the relationship
between the programming tools partition of the Linux community and
commercial vendors seems to be improving.
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Quote
However, I have found that there is certain percentage of Linux
supporters who feel that any piece of software written to run under Linux
should be free for anyone to use
"Open source" is not about "free of charge" (the one who wants a non
existing software function, needs to (and will) pay somebody to create it
for him), but about reusability of existing software (to make the creation
of new functions easy (and thus cheap for the end-user) ).
-Michael
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

Quote
But you don't need to run it on Linux: only deploy on Linux.
... and test.
IMHO if no decent de{*word*81} is available its difficult to deploy decent
applications on a platform.
-Michael
 

Re:Re: Kylix now officialy dead?

== Ursprüngliche Mitteilung von Bob Swart < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >am 10.11.04
17:34
Quote
For me, Windows is the development and testing platform (with Delphi),
and Linux the deployment and testing platform. A remote de{*word*81} might
help (one that can run with one part in the Delphi IDE and the remote
part on Linux, hosting my Linux app)....

Agreed !!! ANDREAS PLEASE !!!!! :)
-Michael