In the framework of the previous question.

Now my part of the zoo for assembly and debugging looks like this: two pieces of iron under Debian / Mint (32, 64), inside stand under VirtualBox FreeBSD, SuSE (as representatives of tarballs, RPM, and other features). And the old XP32 overlooked there. With Windows last dealt about 10 years ago. But now, it seems, will have to. Tasks - mostly "silent" code in C (low-middle level libraries), some quits on Qt.

What to put in order to maintain / debug the code in a compatible form? As far as I understand, unfortunate 32-bit XP in the modern world can be thrown out long ago. Or is it going to live there and in later versions?

PS By "what to put" means not only the OS, but also tools. In any case, the main development is under Linux, and a great temptation to plug in some MinGW in Windows. But I'm afraid this is not the option.

PPS Edge of the ear heard, what else OS X want, finally can be hung up?

  • stackoverflow.com/questions/10934683/… - zb '
  • Aha, about Qt read everything, but it now not the most important task. - user6550
  • If almost all the code is “silent” C libraries, then take make / gcc everywhere (including MinGW in Windows), translate your tests and watch. And what could be the problem? - avp pm
  • "And what is there to be a problem at all?" - I have no idea, therefore I ask. Honestly, what is happening in the "evil corporations" :) I have not been tracking for a long time. I only remember the opinions of more than one programmer: it is best to develop programs for Windows by what they provide. I do not know how true this is (although there seems to be some sense), but mingw is clearly not part of these tools. Well, the main question: what to put in VirtualBox after all :) - user6550
  • @klopp, try to articulate what the task is . To translate and test libraries for different operating systems? Or something different? Then what exactly? / By the way, compared to the HC, I do not receive any notifications, so I don’t even know how you can respond promptly. - avp

1 answer 1

If the emphasis on the C library, then under Windows it is worth using MigGW, since Visual Studio does not fully support C99 (and most likely it will not). At the same time, the Windows version is absolutely not critical here - you are not going to work with it, are you just going to build it? Therefore, choose any and put MinGW - do not go wrong.

As for OS X, it's even easier. gcc 4.2 goes out of the box (if I put compiler tools, or whatever they are called there, I don’t remember). But no one bothers to put a new one from macports or something similar. In this case, any version of OS X (10.6+) will also go, because No binding to Apple’s own tools. For such actions will fit even the OS X installed in the virtual. To complete the work, of course, virtualka is terrible. I tried to work with 10.6 in a virtualka it is just dark. But for the assembly fit.

  • And putting osx in virtualbox is still erotic, as it turns out ... As for Windows, I just don’t know. For example, there is a code to work with SSL (TLS in SMTP). Can I be sure that the code that was written under XP will also be collected and run in 7, 8, 10? - user6550
  • Of course, WInAPI is backward compatible, and MinGW does not use anything system-dependent, as far as I know. I put OS X in VirtualBox without any problems at all, back in the 11th year. - ixSci