Author Topic: Mypal68: A possible alternative browser?  (Read 21550 times)

TeLLie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
  • Karma: +19/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Mypal68: A possible alternative browser?
« Reply #15 on: Today at 11:54:03 am »
Hi

Ko ported meson..

Kind regards Tellie

Jochen Schäfer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
  • Karma: +31/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Mypal68: A possible alternative browser?
« Reply #16 on: Today at 12:12:46 pm »
Thanks for the info, but it's just one example. And, don't get me started on IDEs ;-)

Andi B.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 943
  • Karma: +17/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Mypal68: A possible alternative browser?
« Reply #17 on: Today at 03:59:13 pm »
Thanks for the info, but it's just one example. And, don't get me started on IDEs ;-)
Here maybe Dmitriys approach (SSH file sharing to OS/2 box if I understand it correct) may help. Or running OS/2 virtually in f.i. Linux. But until now I hate doing such. Of course you don't need a browser for OS/2 anymore when running within VBOX....

Dave Yeo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5655
  • Karma: +144/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Mypal68: A possible alternative browser?
« Reply #18 on: Today at 04:56:34 pm »
For compiling large projects like Qt, having a stand alone box would help as you can have the minimal other stuff running to save memory. Likewise with a VBox instance, though I find that with VBox, multiple CPU's doesn't work too well. Running multiple jobs when building can really speed things up if you don't run out of memory. Some of this C++ code uses a lot of memory. I've seen compiling one file take a couple of GB's of memory and even hit my swap file with 3.4 GB's of visible memory when running multiple jobs.
Cross compiling from Linux would be best and in theory quite possible. Linux is way faster at compiling projects then OS/2. OTOH, OS/2 is quite a bit faster then Windows compiling this stuff where there is lots of forking of processes.