From: UnixOS2 Archive
To: "UnixOS2 Archive" <UnixOS2_Archive at unixos2.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 04:19:09 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600
Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 157

**************************************************
Thursday 07 March 2002
 Number  157
**************************************************

Subjects for today
 
1   Re: Viewing Perl POD docs : Masaru Nomiya <nomiya at ttmy.ne.jp>
2  Re:  INFO2INF ? : Jun Sawataishi <jsawa at attglobal.net>
3  Re:  Shell test : James Cannon <cyberspittle at yahoo.com>
4   Shell test : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
5  Re:  Perl v6.0 : Henry Sobotka <sobotka at axess.com>
6  Re:  Shell test : James Cannon <cyberspittle at yahoo.com>
7  Re:  Shell test : email at eracc.hypermart.net
8  Re:  Shell test : csaba.raduly at sophos.com
9  Re:  Shell test : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
10   Perl v6.0 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
11  Re:  Shell test : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
12   Autoconf v2.53 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
13  Re:  Shell test : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
14   GNU C/C++ cross-compiler 2.7.2 for Psion : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
15  Re:  Make problem : Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
16  Re:  Autoconf 2.52h : Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
17  Re:  BSD compatible install... c:/os2/install -c : Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
18  Re: Shell issues, was: Re:  Autoconf 2.52h : Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
19  Re:  M4 tutorial : Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
20  Re:  os2.m4 in Autoconf : Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>

**= Email   1 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 00:36:32 +0900
From:  Masaru Nomiya <nomiya at ttmy.ne.jp>
Subject:   Re: Viewing Perl POD docs

Hello,

In the Message; 

  Subject    : Re:  Re: Viewing Perl POD docs
  Message-ID : <20020307113958.W92 at eyup.org>
  Date & Time: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 11:39:58 +0000

[John] == John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org> has written:

John> Thanks, I tried that, but got this error msg:-

John> Superuser must not run C:\USR\PROCLIB/perldoc.cmd without security audit 
John> and taint checks.

Did you?

John> Any idea what it means or what I should do?
John> I guess it must have something to do with my PASSWD file...

I haven't set such a PASSWD file...
I am sorry, but I haven't got any idea.

  Help! > Sawataishi-San

---
  Masaru Nomiya       mail-to: nomiya at ttmy.ne.jp

          "Bill! You married with Computers.
           Not with Me!"
          "No..., with Money."

**= Email   2 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 00:58:39 +0900
From:  Jun Sawataishi <jsawa at attglobal.net>
Subject:  Re:  INFO2INF ?

John P. wrote:
>Has anyone come across and INFO to INF converter?
We cannnot convert INFO (converted from texinfo source using makeinfo or emacs) to
INF. To get INF file from GNU texinfo source, use texinfo to OS/2 IPFC source 
code. 

    texinfo source ==> IPFC source ==> INF file

I use texi2ipf version 2.2 (Year 1997) and ipfc version 4.00 (from OS/2 installation CDROM). 
For older texinfo soucre, I was able to get INF file, but newer texinfo sources 
have a lot of command for which texi2ipf cannot recognize. So, you should use 
relatively newer texinfo to ipfc converter. 
 How about
  I'd like to test other solutions. 

     texinfo ==> html ==>  IPFC
     texinfo ==> pod (perl document source) ==> IPFC

  

Here I list utilities which I have found. 

pod2ipf.cmd  version 1.11  -- I cannot find out where I got it. 
    by Marko.Macek at snet.fri.uni-lj.si, mark at hermes.si
    with additions by Ilya Zakharevich ilya at math.ohio-state.edu


texi2pod.pl included in wget 1.8.1 source

texi2html: from http://wwwinfo.cern.ch/dis/texi2html/

Under /pub/os2 in hobbes: 

Apr 08 1997  ./apps/internet/www/util/html2ipf-0.1.1.zip
Jan 24 1997  ./apps/internet/www/util/htmlipfd.zip
Jan 31 1995  ./apps/wp/tex/util/texi2ipf.zip
Jan 31 1995  ./apps/wp/tex/util/txi2ipf1.zip
Jul 01 1997  ./util/convert/texipf21.zip -- Texinfo to IPF converter
Jul 01 1997  ./util/convert/txict100.zip  -- Texinfo to IPF converter


>Or maybe a PM version of the INFO viewer?
>
>I find GNU INFO very awkward to use. Wonder if it is configurable as far 
>keyboard definitions go...
  For people's who are customed to view text files using less may not 
have an feelink like John. 
  If you'd like to define key as you like, make GNU texinfo version 4.0f, which
I have already ported and it is working fine on my machine.  May I send 
you a patch or put one in my web page ?
  You will be able to make and install GNU texinfo 4.0f like this. 
      > tar texinfo-4.0f.tar.gz
      > cd texinfo-4.0f
      > unzip SOMEWHERE/texinfo-4.0f-os2.zip
      > unzip OS2Patch
      > os2unix -ALL
      > make
      > make DESTDIR=%UNIXROOT%

To define key function, write ".infokey" file in HOME directory.

#info
\t move-to-next-xref
j next-line
k prev-line
#\kx echo-area-delete
#echo-area-rubout
#echo-area-insert
#var
ISO-Latin=on


And convert ".infokey" to a binary file ".info" using infokey.exe

#EOF


**= Email   3 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:17:41 -0800 (PST)
From:  James Cannon <cyberspittle at yahoo.com>
Subject:  Re:  Shell test

Hi John, you won't get any output. See my comments
below ...
--- John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org> wrote:
> 
> If anyone has access to a Unix system which uses a
> modern shell, could you 
> try running this and seeing if any output is
> produced? :-
> 
> 
> #! /bin/sh
> #
> echo qw er ty ui > temp

Sends values to file called temp. (cat temp, look in
the file called temp)

> while read a b c d

set a=a
set b=b
set c=c
set d=d
while read $a $b $c $d 

> do
>    :
> done < temp

do
cat temp
done

> echo $a
?
> echo $b
?
> echo $c
?
> echo $d

> I don't get anything from any shell on OS/2, so I'm
> not sure if the syntax 
> is correct or if there is something missing from the
> OS/2 ports.
> 
> 
> -- 
> John
> 
> 


=====
Sincerely,
James Cannon

Using OS/2 Warp in the beautiful Wine
Country of Northen California!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

**= Email   4 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:50:23 +0000
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:   Shell test


If anyone has access to a Unix system which uses a modern shell, could you 
try running this and seeing if any output is produced? :-


#! /bin/sh
#
echo qw er ty ui > temp
while read a b c d
do
   :
done < temp
echo $a
echo $b
echo $c
echo $d



I don't get anything from any shell on OS/2, so I'm not sure if the syntax 
is correct or if there is something missing from the OS/2 ports.


-- 
John


**= Email   5 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 10:11:01 -0500
From:  Henry Sobotka <sobotka at axess.com>
Subject:  Re:  Perl v6.0

John Poltorak wrote:
> 
> Does anyone have any idea when Perl v6.0 is likely to be released?

Probably in a few years as Perl is being rewritten from scratch. For
details see http://www.perl.com/pub/q/Article_Archive#Perl6.

h~

**= Email   6 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:15:43 -0800 (PST)
From:  James Cannon <cyberspittle at yahoo.com>
Subject:  Re:  Shell test

I tested it on Solaris and HP-UX. That's as close to
Unix as you can get. The problem was your logic. You
were sending input to temp (a b c d > tmp). Then you
wanted to read unassigned variables in your while ...
do ... done. After that you wanted to see what your
variables had stored. You can echo variables into a
file, but you should assign a value to it first. Once
a value from a variable has been written to a file,
you can read the file.

For a good book on shell programming, look at Korn
Shell Programming Tutorial (HP Press Series, Barry
Rosenberg. Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/020156324X/qid=1015614757/br=1-10/ref=br_lf_b_10/104-8924848-9292742

I think there was some fundamental problems with your
script.

--- John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 09:17:41AM -0800, James
> Cannon wrote:
> > Hi John, you won't get any output. See my comments
> > below ...
> 
> 
> I know I don't get any output, but apparently, if
> I'm using a modern 
> Bourne shell on Unix I would do. I was hoping
> someone would be able 
> to confirm that...
> 
> > =====
> > Sincerely,
> > James Cannon
> > 
> > Using OS/2 Warp in the beautiful Wine
> > Country of Northen California!
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> John
> 
> 
> 


=====
Sincerely,
James Cannon

Using OS/2 Warp in the beautiful Wine
Country of Northen California!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

**= Email   7 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 11:28:31 -0600
From:  email at eracc.hypermart.net
Subject:  Re:  Shell test

 In: <20020308095023.D92 at eyup.org>
 On: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:50:23 +0000
 Screaming:  Shell test
 John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org> did rant:

+If anyone has access to a Unix system which uses a modern shell, could
+you  try running this and seeing if any output is produced? :-

+#! /bin/sh
+#
+echo qw er ty ui > temp
+while read a b c d
+do
+   :
+done < temp
+echo $a
+echo $b
+echo $c
+echo $d

+I don't get anything from any shell on OS/2, so I'm not sure if the
+syntax  is correct or if there is something missing from the OS/2 ports.

With a true '/bin/sh' (not bash) on UnixWare 7.1.0 I get blank lines.
I believe someone has misinformed you if you've been told that would
work to read data from a file.

Gene <gene at eracc.hypermart.net>
-- 
+=========================-=>Unix & OS/2<=-=========================+
#   Owner and C.E.O. - ERA Computer Consulting - Jackson, TN USA    #
#  OS/2, UnixWare, OpenServer & Linux Business Computing Solutions  #
#     Please visit our www pages at http://eracc.hypermart.net/     #
+===================================================================+
               We run IBM OS/2 v.4.00, Revision 9.036                
  Sysinfo: 38 Processes, 155 Threads, uptime is 5d 17h 12m 1s 368ms  


**= Email   8 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:33:17 +0000
From:  csaba.raduly at sophos.com
Subject:  Re:  Shell test


On 08/03/2002 09:50:23 owner-os2-unix wrote:

>If anyone has access to a Unix system which uses a modern shell, could you
>try running this and seeing if any output is produced? :-
>
>
>#! /bin/sh
>#
>echo qw er ty ui > temp
>while read a b c d
>do
>:
>done < temp
>echo $a
>echo $b
>echo $c
>echo $d
>
>

I get this:

bash: ./aaa.sh: bad interpreter: Permission denied

from
GNU bash, version 2.05.0(1)-release (i386-slackware-linux-gnu)
Copyright 2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

Uhhh, scratch that. I forgot the magic incantation of:

chmod a+x aaa.sh

Duh ! Corrected, but I get empty lines when I run it.

--
Csaba Ráduly, Software Engineer                           Sophos Anti-Virus
email: csaba.raduly at sophos.com                        http://www.sophos.com
US Support: +1 888 SOPHOS 9                     UK Support: +44 1235 559933


**= Email   9 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:50:07 +0000
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Shell test

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:33:17AM +0000, csaba.raduly at sophos.com wrote:
> 
> On 08/03/2002 09:50:23 owner-os2-unix wrote:
> 
> >If anyone has access to a Unix system which uses a modern shell, could you
> >try running this and seeing if any output is produced? :-
> >
> >
> >#! /bin/sh
> >#
> >echo qw er ty ui > temp
> >while read a b c d
> >do
> >:
> >done < temp
> >echo $a
> >echo $b
> >echo $c
> >echo $d
 
> Uhhh, scratch that. I forgot the magic incantation of:
> 
> chmod a+x aaa.sh
> 
> Duh ! Corrected, but I get empty lines when I run it.

I was told it works with most modern shells...

Anyway... an alternative which does work on OS/2 is:-

echo qw er ty ui > temp
read a b c d < temp
echo $a
echo $b
echo $c
echo $d

What I can't do is eliminate the temp file. I can't get piping to work 
even though my Shell book tells me that READ will get a line from a pipe.

Is there something missing from this? :-

echo qw er ty ui | read a b c d 
echo $a $b $c $d

 
> --
> Csaba Ráduly, Software Engineer                           Sophos Anti-Virus
> email: csaba.raduly at sophos.com                        http://www.sophos.com
> US Support: +1 888 SOPHOS 9                     UK Support: +44 1235 559933
> 


-- 
John


**= Email   10 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:53:07 +0000
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:   Perl v6.0


Does anyone have any idea when Perl v6.0 is likely to be released?


-- 
John


**= Email   11 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:43:38 +0000
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Shell test

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 09:17:41AM -0800, James Cannon wrote:
> Hi John, you won't get any output. See my comments
> below ...


I know I don't get any output, but apparently, if I'm using a modern 
Bourne shell on Unix I would do. I was hoping someone would be able 
to confirm that...

> =====
> Sincerely,
> James Cannon
> 
> Using OS/2 Warp in the beautiful Wine
> Country of Northen California!



-- 
John



**= Email   12 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 19:13:05 +0000
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:   Autoconf v2.53



Autoconf v2.53 has now been released and you can get it from:-

ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/autoconf/autoconf-2.53.tar.gz


I have no idea how well it works with OS/2, but it would be nice if I 
could get SED, GREP, AWK, M4, and all the other recent ports built with 
it.


-- 
John 


**= Email   13 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 19:27:42 +0000
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Shell test

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:15:43AM -0800, James Cannon wrote:
> I tested it on Solaris and HP-UX. That's as close to
> Unix as you can get. The problem was your logic. You
> were sending input to temp (a b c d > tmp). Then you
> wanted to read unassigned variables in your while ...
> do ... done. After that you wanted to see what your
> variables had stored. You can echo variables into a
> file, but you should assign a value to it first. Once
> a value from a variable has been written to a file,
> you can read the file.
> 
> For a good book on shell programming, look at Korn
> Shell Programming Tutorial (HP Press Series, Barry
> Rosenberg. Amazon link:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/020156324X/qid=1015614757/br=1-10/ref=br_lf_b_10/104-8924848-9292742

I may just get that.
 
> I think there was some fundamental problems with your
> script.

It isn't my script. It's something which was suggested in comp.unix.shell 
on USENET today in response to my query about 'Parsing a line of text'.


> =====
> Sincerely,
> James Cannon
> 
> Using OS/2 Warp in the beautiful Wine
> Country of Northen California!


-- 
John


**= Email   14 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 8 Mar 2002 20:20:17 +0000
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:   GNU C/C++ cross-compiler 2.7.2 for Psion


Anyone know anything about this? :-


On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 02:42:46PM -0500, madodel at ptdprolog.net wrote:
> From: tam at gmx.de (Timo Maier) 
> 
> GNU C/C++ cross-compiler 2.7.2 for Psion
> 
> C/C++ cross-compiler version cygnus-2.7.2-960323  (Psion GCC tools v113
> 05/03/1997) ported and built  for OS/2 host platform
> 
> http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/pub/incoming/epoc2-gcc.zip
> http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/cgi-bin/h-search?key=epoc2-gcc.zip


Can we get it incorporated into v3.0.3?

-- 
John


**= Email   15 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 23:49:10 +0100
From:  Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
Subject:  Re:  Make problem

Dave and Natalie wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 06 Mar 2002 00:34:01 +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
> 
> >However, to avoid thing like "Drive x: not ready"
> >binaries should be built for "c:".
> 
> This seems strange, I think that most OS/2 users keep a win partition around which is C:. Why not just build
> for /. 

The problem is that "/" is not really an absolute file name.
If a program really needs these hardcoded paths then
is functionality depends on your current drive.
E.g.: you've installed GNU foo on d:, its hardcoded prefix
is "/whatever". If you use foo from d: everthing is okay,
but if your current drive is e: it may fail with
"file /whatever/blurb not found". Or even worse:
On e: may be another "blurb" file from another version
and you get unpredictable behavior.

To avoid this I propose to use an absolute path
_including_ a drive letter. But which one? If you use
e: or z: or whatever it's possible that this drive is
a CD ROM or zip drive ot whatever. An access to this drive
would be not only annoying but also slow. The idea is, 
that every OS/2 user has a readable hard disk partition c:, 
no matter whether it is HPFS or FAT or whatever.
(okay, with LVM you should be able to avoid c:)
If the file can't be found on c:/whatever then
$UNIXROOT/whatever should be tried.

However, the question arises: Why a hardcoded prefix
at all? One could define that all programs should look
in $UNIXROOT/whatever and only there.
But in this case if anybody wants to compile and install
GNU foo in g:/test/foo he isn't able to do so because
every request is redirected to $UNIXROOT (which might be d:).


> I always use --prefix=/usr and haven't had any problems. Sometimes I'm using F:, my main data partition
> which has a Unix file system on it and sometimes I use X: which is a TVFS volume also with a Unix filesystem.
> Everything else is referenced by %PATH% or enviroment variables. EMX is on E:
> With HD price/Gb ratio I think most all users should be able to have a large enough partition to have their *nix
> file system.

You can exspect that everybody _installs_ his precompiled
unixos2 stuff on one single drive so that $UNIXROOT works,
but you cannot expect that everybody _has_ only one
OS/2 partition.

> Of course %UNIXROOT% is also a good solution.

bye,
Andreas

-- 
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.

**= Email   16 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 23:53:33 +0100
From:  Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
Subject:  Re:  Autoconf 2.52h

Henry Sobotka wrote:
> 
> Andreas Buening wrote:
> >
> > No, it's not. It's extremely fragile. If you change a period
> > it will fail.
> 
> If I stick my hand into my car's engine and yank a wire or hose loose,
> it too might fail, but that doesn't make it fragile machinery. By your
> criterion, one could equally say that C is a fragile language because a
> program can fail due to writing "=" instead of "==", or that gcc is a
> fragile compiler because a trivial typo in the code can cause it to spew
> voluminously and bail.

Funny comparison. Okay, then please tell me: Where in that
doc file is the sentence:
"DO NOT USE BASH! If you're using bash please enter 'exit'
on your command line before you may dare to run './Configure'"
Additionally, where is the list of env. vars. that must
be unset before I may start "./Configure"?


> > It might be that everything is
> > mentioned in the README.os2 file, but I really doubt.
> 
> Actually the Perl documentation includes a lengthy OS/2 section, where
> you'll find detailed build instructions starting with toolkit
> requirements and ending with test results and common problems. Follow
> them carefully and it's a cakewalk.

<irony>
To add another funny comparison: What would you say to
an installation instruction like
- put "cat" from textutils 1.2 into /usr/bin
- put "sed" into /bin
- use a grep version below 2.3 but at least 1.9.3
- don't use "tr" from textutils 1.2, either use
  1.1 or 1.3
- run "Configure" when your daytime is a multiple of 5
- use option --foo=xyz where "xyz" is the md5 checksum
  of your volume label
- run make

These are also detailed build instructions. Follow them
carefully and it's a catwalk? The more prerequisites you
need the more fragile the final result will be.
</irony>

What I'm trying to tell you is that compiling perl
was everything else than a "catwalk" on my system.
I got no hint from the build system what's wrong,
so I tried and tried and tried.
If it compiles on the fly on your or the maintainer's
system it's nice for you. But nevertheless the current
build system is fragile and this should be fixed.


> > Nevertheless, according to my current perl
> > experience the perl build mechanism is more vi, which means
> > it's in the middle of evil. ;-)
> 
> The Perl build system is not of the autoconf-automake genre, and I'm
> inclined to doubt Makefile.am's will ever replace Makefile.PL's. To
> consider it evil because it's different is like calling apples a bane
> because they don't peel the way oranges do. Complex projects often have
> special requirements. Mozilla expects "gbash" and "gmake" (literally).
> Building gcc you get into trouble by running "make" instead of "make
> bootstrap", or not doing it from a directory outside the src tree. Perl
> also has the distinction of being a programming language and interpreter
> as opposed to "yet another" GNU utility. From my experience, that makes
> it all the more likely to have its own build system best taken on its
> own terms.

I never said that an autoconf generated configure provides
a failure safe build mechanism. If it works on my system
it doesn't mean it will work on your system and it may be that
the problem is not considered in the README files.
We simply need more beta testers and fixes to make all
build mechanism for OS/2 as stable as for Linux.

bye,
Andreas

-- 
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.

**= Email   17 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 23:53:45 +0100
From:  Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
Subject:  Re:  BSD compatible install... c:/os2/install -c

John Poltorak wrote:
> 
> When building GREP v2.4.2 the configure script locates the wrong
> install program.
> 
> Every other configure script locates:-
> 
> c:/usr/bin/install
> 
> The path is:-
> 
> c:\usr\bin;c:\os2;
> 
> and I'm using the same build script and environment. What would cause GREP
> to behave differently? I can only guess that it must be something in
> GREP's configure.in file...

No, there's only "AC_PROG_INSTALL" which should be the default.
The only thing I can imagine is that this configure script
has been created by a different autoconf version.
(However, I cannot reproduce this behaviour)

bye,
Andreas

-- 
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.

**= Email   18 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 23:54:25 +0100
From:  Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
Subject:  Re: Shell issues, was: Re:  Autoconf 2.52h

John Poltorak wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 09:05:54PM +0100, Thomas Hoffmann wrote:
> > Fine, so let's start to collect problems of the different shells
> > and talk the respective maintainers in fixing "their" shells.
> 
> I've been trying to put together a list of issues with various shells for
> some time, but there seems to be little interest in doing so.
> 
> In addition, I'm not sure how many shells are actively maintained...
> 
> ASH is no longer maintained - maintainer has disappeared.
> BASH old version - maintainer's plans for update not known
> PDKSH recent release - active maintainer
> TCSH old version - maintainer's plans for update not known
> ZSH is no longer maintained - maintainer not known
> 
> What other shells are available?

Please forget tcsh. It's nice to have it but it's not
sh compatible and therefore it won't help here.

[snip]

bye,
Andreas

-- 
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.

**= Email   19 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 23:54:56 +0100
From:  Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
Subject:  Re:  M4 tutorial

John Poltorak wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know if anything like an M4 tutorial exists anywhere?
> 
> I don't really have any idea why it is specifically used by Autoconf, but
> it seems pretty fundamental to having an understanding of how Autoconf
> works.

It translates the autoconf code somehow into sh code. I don't
think you'll need to understand how it works exactly. You also
don't need to understand how a C compiler works to write C code.

bye,
Andreas

-- 
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.

**= Email   20 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 08 Mar 2002 23:55:52 +0100
From:  Andreas Buening <andreas.buening at nexgo.de>
Subject:  Re:  os2.m4 in Autoconf

John Poltorak wrote:
> 
> Here's a reply I got from the autoconf list about including OS/2 specific
> code:-
> 
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 06:59:28PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> > >>>>> "John" == John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org> writes:
> >
> > John> test -f $THISPLATFORM.m4 && use $THISPLATFORM.m4
> >
> > In lib/autom4te.cfg, you add:
> >
> >        ## ---------- ##
> >        ## Autoconf.  ##
> >        ## ---------- ##
> >
> >        begin-language: "Autoconf"
> >        # patterns: "*.ac"
> >        # patterns: "configure.in"
> >        args: --include /usr/local/share/autoconf
> >        args: autoconf/autoconf.m4f
> >        args: acsite.m4?
> >        args: aclocal.m4?
> > args: os2.m4?
> >        args: --mode 777
> >        args: --warning syntax
> >        args: --language Autoheader-preselections
> >        args: --language Automake-preselections
> >        args: --language Autoreconf-preselections
> >        args: --language Autoscan-preselections
> >        args: --language M4sh
> >        end-language: "Autoconf"
> >
> 
> Does this mean anything to anyone here?

These are command line options for autom4te to handle
some files.


> What I'm thinking about is how to include some of the patches in the OS/2
> port of v2.50 for Autoheader which substituted some functions such as stat()
> for lstat().
> 
> Is os2.m4 something that we need to put together? Anyone got an example?

This is a good question. A while ago there was a discussion
whether it makes sense to define some macros for fchown(),
readlink(), whatever.
That code in autoconf 2.50 was intended to be _experimental_.
However, at least the following conditions must be met:
- it must be possible to turn these features off
- it must work reliable and become some kind of unixos2
  standard.
- it must be compatible with EMX as well as with LIBEMU
  (i.e. initialize_main() means _wildcard() for EMX and
  nothing for LIBEMU)
- it must be reasonable documented


Meanwhile I think the right place to define lstat and
lchown is in lstat.m4 and lchown.m4 respectively.
(these are macro files that deal with broken lstat()/lchown()
implementations for various unix systems).

strcasecmp()/strncasecmp() should be handled in string.h.

initialize_main() would be a nice idea for autoconf.

The best place to handle fchown()/chown()/symlink()/...
might be in the according header file of each package.

What I won't like is another test like those
"testing for AIX/Cygwin/Mingw environment..." 


bye,
Andreas

-- 
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.