I am in process of porting a compiler and am curious as to application naming. Since I don't see the Amiga changes merged back into the main repository what is considered the generally accepted naming.

I see a lot of AmiThis or AmiThat. Would that be best direction for a fork?

Thanks
Doug

You could just keep the name - e.g. GCC is also called GCC in the AmigaOS port.

Best regards,

Niels

@DStastny

If it's a compiler of some kind, definitly keep the same name, unless there is a copyrights /tradmark issue.

@DStastny

"Since I don't see the Amiga changes merged back into the main repository what is considered the generally accepted naming."

So you did not make changes, and you say you ported it? ha ha…

The definition of porting is make changes to make it work on different system in your case you just recompiled it.

I don't know what compiler you taking about, but if was vasm.

I compiled VASM the other day, the only changes I made was in the makefiles..

So the compiler should produce the binaries I need, (HUNK/680x0).

I compiled VSAM with GCC, so the result is a
PPC/ELF compiler producing 680x0/HUNK files.

The normal version of VASM.

Is a PPC/ELF compiler that produces PPC/ELF binraries.
or 680x0/HUNK compiler that produces 680x0/HUNK binraries

Because I did not produce a normal vasm, it find it useful to name it some thing else "AmigaOS4_Cross_Compiler_vasmm68k_mot".

I was going to push back git-hub but have not, I was not sure it was the right place to make the changes.
If you managed to compile vasm from my repo without the changes, then well I guess you did not need it anyway.

Or might just downloaded the compiled vasm version from, my hippoplayer fork.

@DStastny
IMHO, keep the name the same, unless you made big changes/improvements to functionality. Otherwise it's just confusing to have different names for the same thing (albiet on different Oses).

And names like "AmiWhatever" tend to be for programs written from the ground-up for the Amiga (perhaps copying the appearance or behaviour of a Windows program), not for ports.

@LiveForIt

Quote:

I think you read that worng, he's saying that he doesn't expect the changes he made to be merged "upstream" which is often the case.

@broadblues

Thank you for clarifying you are correct.

@LiveForIt your real friendly fellow.


Thank you all for inputs sounds like just keeping the fork in GIT will be direction I take.

Regards
Doug

@DStastny

Quote:

Please at least make an effort to get your changes merged upstream. Open source maintainers are usually happy to merge changes for obscure machines and often comment that they used to own an Amiga.

There are far too many applications ported to the Amiga where the changes have to be applied again, every time there's a new version, just because the changes have not been merged back (and most likely have not even been attempted to be merged back).