Over the past couple of weeks, lots of RISC OS applications have been converted to 32 bit. Just for you lucky people, here is a quick roundup.
GCC
GCC, the free-for-all compiler for RISC OS, has been updated to be able to run on 32 bit machines, and now produces 32 bit output by default. Peter "Chocky" Naulls has made this version available on riscos.info.
FTPc
FTPc is now at version 1.38 and is fully 32 bit compatible. Other improvements have been added to FTPc which are detailed on the FTPc website. As the FTPc website explains, "!FTPc is an internet ftp client for RISC OS. It enables you to drag and frop files and directories to and from your website or from any other ftp site on the internet."
PDF
PDF has also been made 32 bit compatible taking the version to 1.01.1.08. Other improvements have also been added which, as with FTPc, are available on the PDF website. PDF, as the name suggests is a PDF file viewer for RISC OS. As the website says, "It is a port of Derek B Noonburg's xpdf program and further develops Leo Smiers PDF program."
Desklib
Returning to the programming area, Peter "Chocky" Naulls has also released a 32 bit version of Desklib. This is available from Peter's riscos.info website.
Update
For a more complete list, the Castle Iyonix site has a list of supported software which names such important bits of software as Zap, TechWriter, and, um, Solitaire :)
| |
Lots of 32-bittiness (updated) |
| |
(19:40 23/11/2002)
moss (02:11 24/11/2002)
ams (15:54 24/11/2002)
takkaria (17:13 24/11/2002)
Iyonix (19:09 24/11/2002)
anti-XScale (23:20 24/11/2002)
ARMed (23:54 24/11/2002)
Jake M (09:54 25/11/2002)
Jake M (09:59 25/11/2002)
moss (10:01 25/11/2002)
Jake M (10:56 25/11/2002)
moss (11:12 25/11/2002)
monkeyson2 (11:29 25/11/2002)
tribbles (13:09 25/11/2002)
NeilWB (16:01 25/11/2002)
|
| |
|
ThirtyTwoBits |
Message #91466, posted at 19:40, 23/11/2002 |
| Unregistered user
|
Boring. Boring. All we ever hear any more is "32bit 32bit 32bit". It's getting just ridiculous. Change the record. Let's see some *actual* development. Archive this month is just the same... plain boring and dull dull dull. |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
John Hoare |
Message #91467, posted by moss at 02:11, 24/11/2002, in reply to message #91466 |
Posts: 9348
|
Strikes me that applications becoming 32-bit is very important for the future of the platform. Give it a chance; I'm sure feature development will happen soon. After all, there's no point continuing to develop 26-bit code. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Annraoi |
Message #91468, posted by ams at 15:54, 24/11/2002, in reply to message #91467 |
Member
Posts: 56
|
Agreed, 32bit is a NECESSITY. Without it we're limited to 233/306MHz SA-110's, whereas the rest of the world can use 733MHz Xscales and (when it becomes available) Samsungs Halla (ARM10/1.2GHz). Without a 32bit OS (and 32bit apps) these would not be a viable option. To be honest I don't think I've seen as much activity in the csa newsgroups in ages - and that added interest suggests that things are looking somewhat up (and certainly FAR from boring). Regards Annraoi |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew Sidwell |
Message #91469, posted by takkaria at 17:13, 24/11/2002, in reply to message #91468 |
Member
Posts: 324
|
Just because 32bittedness is the thing that is advertised most about a new release doesn't mean it's not got new features. For example, DeskLib has had a lot more done to it than just an upgrade to being able to 32bit. *wonders why he's replying to a troll* andy/takka. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Censored |
Message #91470, posted by Iyonix at 19:09, 24/11/2002, in reply to message #91469 |
Member
Posts: 235
|
And PDF works better with some rubbish PDFs I have :D |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
anti-XScale |
Message #91471, posted at 23:20, 24/11/2002, in reply to message #91470 |
| Unregistered user
|
Am I the only one who has noticed that the XScale isn't actually an ARM? It happens to execute ARM code, but there is not ARM IP in it, and ARM have no control over it. Intel are quite at liberty to change it in ways that make it incompatable with real ARMs at any point they wish (and in certian respects, it already is.) Saying that, not many people seemed to notice that the StrongARM isn't actually an ARM, either. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
ARMed |
Message #91472, posted at 23:54, 24/11/2002, in reply to message #91471 |
| Unregistered user
|
Intel license the ARM core in the XScale from ARM. Have a look on the ARM web site under CPU's. Incidently, the ARM7500 is made by Cirrus Logic... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jake M |
Message #91473, posted at 09:54, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91472 |
| Unregistered user
|
I agree with Mr 32 in a way. If Aemulator/Omega allow decent 26bitty software to run, then I'd much rather see development put into wizzy NEW software. If it means 26-bit software appears on the way, then that's great of course. Onwards and upwards, chaps, onwards and upwards. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jake M |
Message #91474, posted at 09:59, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91473 |
| Unregistered user
|
Make that "...if 36-bit software appears along the way..." |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
John Hoare |
Message #91475, posted by moss at 10:01, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91474 |
Posts: 9348
|
But 32-bitting stuff means that things will run *much* faster; Aemulator, clever though it is, will surely make 26-bit code run slower than on a Kinetic now... Surely the whole *point* of the Iyonix is to make things faster, after all :-) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jake M |
Message #91476, posted at 10:56, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91475 |
| Unregistered user
|
I'd say it's also to take the market forward - to inspire new development. "Just" recompiling with 32 bit flags isn't that impressive. It's nevertheless welcome, but I think we need more than a Kinetic with go-faster stripes. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
John Hoare |
Message #91477, posted by moss at 11:12, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91476 |
Posts: 9348
|
Well, yes; but surely the main reason that the Iyonix will bring the market forward and inspire new development is *because* it's so much faster! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #91478, posted by monkeyson2 at 11:29, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91477 |
 Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
I think we're both agreeing. Hopefully the Iyonix will not just make things run faster, but will allow new programs/enhancements to be written that would be just too slow previously. Unfortunately the pessimist in me thinks that only the former will happen in any significant way. :| That said, I'm always pessimistic in my predictions - so that the reality seems better. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Tribbeck |
Message #91479, posted by tribbles at 13:09, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91478 |
 Captain Helix
Posts: 929
|
Unfortunately, I forgot to mention that ROVLib was now 32-bit compatible, until the day after I saw that DeskLib was too. Ho hum. Making something 32-bit compatible often isn't just as simple as recompiling it; I certainly do a lot of my stuff in assembler (although it's getting less now), and that's normally a little more complicated to do. I mean, I had to write a PERL script to change all the code ;-) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
NeilWB |
Message #91480, posted at 16:01, 25/11/2002, in reply to message #91479 |
| Unregistered user
|
I think the point is - someone has a VISION for the desktop RISC OS market! Rgds. Neil |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
