From: UnixOS2 Archive
To: "UnixOS2 Archive" <UnixOS2_Archive at unixos2.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 04:32:17 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600
Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 273

**************************************************
Sunday 14 July 2002
 Number  273
**************************************************

Subjects for today
 
1  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1 : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" <Sebastian.Wittmeier at ginko.de>
2  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1 : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" <Sebastian.Wittmeier at ginko.de>
3  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : Maynard" <maynard.o at discourse.mentabolism.org>
4   Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
5  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
6   novice orientation : Maynard" <maynard.o at discourse.mentabolism.org>
7  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : lordspigol" <spigol at hotpop.com>
8  Re:  cc : lordspigol" <spigol at hotpop.com>
9  Re:  cc : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
10  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
11  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1 : csaba.raduly at sophos.com
12  Re:  cc : csaba.raduly at sophos.com
13  Re:  cc : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
14  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
15  Re:  cc : csaba.raduly at sophos.com
16  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
17  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
18   Ogg Vorbis goes gold : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
19  Re:  cc : csaba.raduly at sophos.com
20  Re:  cc : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
21  Re:  novice orientation : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
22  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
23  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3 : lordspigol" <spigol at hotpop.com>

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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 00:57:47 +0200 (CEST)
From:  "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" <Sebastian.Wittmeier at ginko.de>
Subject:  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1

Hi,

files not downloaded by gather.cmd (but exist on the ftp):
\baseline\archives\make-3_76_1s.zip

cp, mv, and rm in baseline_inst.cmd need gnufu.dll and gnuintl.dll

long.cmd needs regex.dll for sed

rm in emx_inst.cmd needs gnufu.dll and gnuintl.dll

errors in build_perl.cmd:
e:\usr\bin\mkdir: cannot make directory `e:/tmp': File exists
e:\usr\bin\mkdir: cannot make directory `e:/logs': File exists

"Could not find manual pages in source form."
(your log shows "system manual is in c:/usr/man/man1")

make needs intl.dll

lib/os2_ea: failed at test 7
(your logs show success)

altogether: 8/261 failed, 96,93% okay

Sebastian



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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 01:00:34 +0200 (CEST)
From:  "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" <Sebastian.Wittmeier at ginko.de>
Subject:  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1

On Mon, 8 Jul 2002 12:14:09 +0100, John Poltorak wrote:

>If the whole thing runs correctly, you may see a perl.exe in 
>\tmp\perl-5.6.1 after an hour or more.

on my one year old PC (Athlon 1400): 6 minutes

Sebastian



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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 08:34:16 -0500 (CDT)
From:  "Maynard" <maynard.o at discourse.mentabolism.org>
Subject:  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3

Anybody,

>It would be nice to get a clean build on OS/2 before the final release, so 
>give it a try if you can.

I would really appreciate a complete step-by-step-for-dumbasses
direction for what I need to do from an os/2 command prompt to compile
and test these.

I have the distribution unpacked, and John's baseline deployed, but
probably need to fix path and libpath and any other environment
appropriate to running sh.

I have some linux console experience, and programmed/compiled Borland
Pascal through BP7, but I find myself at a complete loss without
compass on this project just now.

Thanks a bunch,

	`~Maynard



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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 09:24:50 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:   Perl 5.8.0 RC3


There's an announcement for RC3 of Perl 5.8.0 here:-

http://www.iki.fi/jhi/5.8.0-RC3-anno


I haven't tried it myself yet, but I think a number of things relating to 
OS/2 have been changed.

It would be nice to get a clean build on OS/2 before the final release, so 
give it a try if you can.


-- 
John 


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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 09:59:18 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 12:57:47AM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> files not downloaded by gather.cmd (but exist on the ftp):
> \baseline\archives\make-3_76_1s.zip
> 
> cp, mv, and rm in baseline_inst.cmd need gnufu.dll and gnuintl.dll
> 
> long.cmd needs regex.dll for sed
> 
> rm in emx_inst.cmd needs gnufu.dll and gnuintl.dll
> 
> errors in build_perl.cmd:
> e:\usr\bin\mkdir: cannot make directory `e:/tmp': File exists
> e:\usr\bin\mkdir: cannot make directory `e:/logs': File exists
> 
> "Could not find manual pages in source form."
> (your log shows "system manual is in c:/usr/man/man1")
> 
> make needs intl.dll
> 
> lib/os2_ea: failed at test 7
> (your logs show success)
> 
> altogether: 8/261 failed, 96,93% okay

Many thanks for the posting your results. They do show a need to be extra 
careful with DLLs. It looks as though I may have been pulling them in from 
locations on my LIBPATH, instead ofhe correct locations. 

The additional Make archive was leftover from a previous build. I'm still 
not sure which release of Make (and sed) to include in the baseline. I 
think I will revert to previous versions, in order to simplify the use of 
DLLs, although I hope to use the baseline build to rebuild the newer 
versions.

The difference in the perl test may be related to something on my LIBPATH.
I can't think what else it could be.

Is there any way to run test 7 in isolation? Personally, I find the tests 
difficult to follow and can't work out what this test is doing.

 
> Sebastian


-- 
John



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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 10:34:09 -0500 (CDT)
From:  "Maynard" <maynard.o at discourse.mentabolism.org>
Subject:   novice orientation


I was expecting an interactive session after running 'sh' and receiving
the '#' prompt; that isn't working here, but running the .sh file from
a .cmd file has started the process.

For debugging I prefer "one step at a time", so I thought I'd sit at
the shell prompt and issue instructions as found in the .sh file; which
would be a lot less awkward than modifying the .sh file between runs
and re-executing the .cmd file.

I still expect that there must be some environment, ala PATH and
LIBPATH which are critical; and will probably turn up as an error
sooner or later.


--
Maynard



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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 11:06:07 -0300 (ADT)
From:  "lordspigol" <spigol at hotpop.com>
Subject:  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3

I feel like you, Maynard.

Some experience with Linux but at total loss trying
understand what do, *exactly*.

This thing of compiling Unix projects on OS/2 is a hell. :(

I already compiled some programs on Linux & find it a pita.

But I need learn compiling something otherwise I will not
be able have news utilities, so needed in our OS2 world.

Thanks by reading,
Rod, Brasil

On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 08:34:16 -0500 (CDT), Maynard wrote:

>Anybody,
>
>>It would be nice to get a clean build on OS/2 before the final release, so 
>>give it a try if you can.
>
>I would really appreciate a complete step-by-step-for-dumbasses
>direction for what I need to do from an os/2 command prompt to compile
>and test these.
>
>I have the distribution unpacked, and John's baseline deployed, but
>probably need to fix path and libpath and any other environment
>appropriate to running sh.
>
>I have some linux console experience, and programmed/compiled Borland
>Pascal through BP7, but I find myself at a complete loss without
>compass on this project just now.
>
>Thanks a bunch,
>
>	`~Maynard
>
>
>




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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 11:12:37 -0300 (ADT)
From:  "lordspigol" <spigol at hotpop.com>
Subject:  Re:  cc

You said what I already knew. But this really leaves very curious.

Why three indentical executable instead only one?

Rod

On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:44:13 +0100, csaba.raduly at sophos.com wrote:

>GNU grep 2.0 comes with three executables called grep, egrep and fgrep,
>all 2k in size. They all interchangeable. In fact, they are identical.
>"egrep -f" is supposed to act as fgrep and so on.




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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 12:03:54 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  cc

On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 06:44:07PM +0100, csaba.raduly at sophos.com wrote:
> 
> On 14/07/2002 12:50:57 owner-os2-unix wrote:
> 
> >I'm thinking of including cc.exe as a copy of gcc.exe in a standard
> >UnixOS/2 distro. I tried to use cc.cmd which consisted of:-
> >
> >gcc %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
> >
> >but it wouldn't work.
> 
> Configure scripts are usually shell scripts and they may or may not be able
> to launch cmd.exe with cc.cmd when asked to run 'cc'. Indeed, they may not
> be able to launch cc.exe either.

The requirement for cc.exe arose when trying to build BYACC. That doesn't 
use a configure script, but comes with a Makefile hardcoded to use 'cc' 
not $(CC).

> You might have better luck with a shell script called 'cc' (no extension)
> which would pass the required parameters to gcc.
> 
> Thomas Dickey already gave a small example program to be called cc.exe.
> Compiled with -Zomf -Zsys might make it even smaller.

I tried these flags but the resultant cc.exe was bigger than the one I got 
with when using:-

gcc -o cc.exe cc.c

> >Has anyone got any comments about adding cc.exe?
> >
> 
> Providing cc.exe might encourage complacency. Programs (distributed in
> surce) should be able to build without an executable called 'cc'

I could find any way to do this in the case of BYACC. I wasn't keen on 
hacking the BYACC archive just to make it work on OS/2. By creating a 
cc.exe, it built without any amendments.
 
> Note that GNU make can be compiled with a GCC_IS_NATIVE preprocessor
> define, which would change a number of predefined variables:
> 
> $(CC)   would be defined as 'gcc' instead of 'cc'
> $(CXX)  would be defined as 'gcc' instead of 'g++'
> $(LEX)  would be 'flex' instead of 'lex'
> $(YACC) would be 'bison'
> 
> I think for OS/2, gcc _is_ native, as there isn't a system default
> compiler like in Unix.
> Unfortunately, most makefiles don't use the builtin rules.

Maybe we need to build Make with specific options.

Are there any options in the current release which you think need looking 
at?


-- 
John



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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 13:32:40 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 09:24:50AM +0100, John Poltorak wrote:
> 
> There's an announcement for RC3 of Perl 5.8.0 here:-
> 
> http://www.iki.fi/jhi/5.8.0-RC3-anno
> 
> 
> I haven't tried it myself yet, but I think a number of things relating to 
> OS/2 have been changed.
> 
> It would be nice to get a clean build on OS/2 before the final release, so 
> give it a try if you can.

After trying it, it seems like a backward step from RC2. With RC2 I was 
able to build it and run the tests. RC3 ended up with plenty of 
compilation errors.

If anyone wants to give RC2 a try, you can get it from:- 

ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/CPAN/src/perl-5.8.0-RC2.tgz


-- 
John


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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 13:44:19 +0100
From:  csaba.raduly at sophos.com
Subject:  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1


On 15/07/2002 09:59:18 owner-os2-unix wrote:

[snip]
>
>The additional Make archive was leftover from a previous build. I'm still
>not sure which release of Make (and sed) to include in the baseline. I

Perl is particularly finicky about sed and used to work with one
particular version only.

>think I will revert to previous versions, in order to simplify the use of
>DLLs, although I hope to use the baseline build to rebuild the newer
>versions.
>
>The difference in the Perl test may be related to something on my LIBPATH.
>I can't think what else it could be.
>
>Is there any way to run test 7 in isolation?

Quote from t/README:
"If a test fails, run it by itself to see if it prints any informative
diagnostics."
All tests are Perl scripts and can be run by themselves.

>Personally, I find the tests
>difficult to follow and can't work out what this test is doing.
>

They are written in Perl, and some of them aren't commented at all :-(


--
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   12 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:02:57 +0100
From:  csaba.raduly at sophos.com
Subject:  Re:  cc


On 15/07/2002 12:03:54 owner-os2-unix wrote:

>On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 06:44:07PM +0100, csaba.raduly at sophos.com wrote:
[snip]
>> Thomas Dickey already gave a small example program to be called cc.exe.
>> Compiled with -Zomf -Zsys might make it even smaller.
>
>I tried these flags but the resultant cc.exe was bigger than the one I got
>with when using:-
>
>gcc -o cc.exe cc.c
>

Grrr, there should have been a -Zcrtdll there somewhere :-)
Try -Zcrtdll both with -Zomf -Zsys and without


--
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   13 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:23:21 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  cc

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 02:02:57PM +0100, csaba.raduly at sophos.com wrote:
> 
> On 15/07/2002 12:03:54 owner-os2-unix wrote:
> 
> >On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 06:44:07PM +0100, csaba.raduly at sophos.com wrote:
> [snip]
> >> Thomas Dickey already gave a small example program to be called cc.exe.
> >> Compiled with -Zomf -Zsys might make it even smaller.
> >
> >I tried these flags but the resultant cc.exe was bigger than the one I got
> >with when using:-
> >
> >gcc -o cc.exe cc.c
> >
> 
> Grrr, there should have been a -Zcrtdll there somewhere :-)
> Try -Zcrtdll both with -Zomf -Zsys and without


gcc: -Zcrtdll and -Zsys are incompatible



gcc cc.c -Zcrtdll -Zomf

=>  15-07-02   2:16p      2908          49  cc.exe


That seems OK.



Anyone else want to try this? :-


 at echo off
echo #include ^<stdlib.h^>>>cc.c
echo #include ^<unistd.h^>>>cc.c
echo.>>cc.c
echo int main(int argc, char *argv[])>>cc.c
echo {>>cc.c
echo         argv[0] = "gcc";>>cc.c
echo         return execvp(argv[0], argv) ? EXIT_FAILURE : 
EXIT_SUCCESS;>>cc.c
echo }>>cc.c
gcc cc.c -Zcrtdll -Zomf 



Can I do something similar for egrep and fgrep which are basically copies 
of grep? Maybe gawk as well?


-- 
John


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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:37:52 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Baseline toolset RC1

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 01:00:34AM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jul 2002 12:14:09 +0100, John Poltorak wrote:
> 
> >If the whole thing runs correctly, you may see a perl.exe in 
> >\tmp\perl-5.6.1 after an hour or more.
> 
> on my one year old PC (Athlon 1400): 6 minutes

Wow! Puts all my old junk to shame.

Your system needs to be a little stretched. Maybe try Perl 5.8.0 RC2.
That should take at least 10 mins... It's been running a couple of hours 
here.

You may need to change build_perl.sh a little:-


# !sh

export PATH=`echo -E $PATH |tr '\\\\' '/'`

CWD=`pwd`
AWK=$RT/bin/awk.exe
export AWK

cd /tmp
tar zxf /$REPOSITORY/perl-5.8.0-RC2.tgz
cd perl-5.8.0-rc2
#patch -p0 < os2\diff.configure
Configure  -Dusedevel -des -D prefix=$RT/usr/lib/perl
make
make test
make install
cd t
perl harness 


The Perl archive is available here:-


ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/CPAN/src/perl-5.8.0-RC2.tgz

Here is the summary after running 'perl harness':-


Failed 21/722 test scripts, 97.09% okay. 96/64734 subtests failed, 99.85% okay.
Failed Test                       Stat Wstat Total Fail  Failed  List of Failed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
../ext/DB_File/t/db-btree.t          0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../ext/DB_File/t/db-hash.t           0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../ext/DB_File/t/db-recno.t          0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../ext/IO/lib/IO/t/io_multihomed.  255 65280     8    8 100.00%  1-8
../ext/IO/lib/IO/t/io_sock.t       255 65280    20   20 100.00%  1-20
../ext/IO/lib/IO/t/io_udp.t        255 65280     7    7 100.00%  1-7
../ext/Socket/Socket.t              29  7424    16   15  93.75%  2-16
../lib/AnyDBM_File.t                 0    15    12   12 100.00%  1-12
../lib/ExtUtils/t/Mkbootstrap.t      1   256    18    1   5.56%  8
../lib/ExtUtils/t/Packlist.t         1   256    34    1   2.94%  17
../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t            1   256    17    1   5.88%  14
../lib/Memoize/t/errors.t            0    15    11    8  72.73%  4-11
../lib/Memoize/t/tie.t               0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../lib/Net/Ping/t/110_icmp_inst.t  255 65280     2    1  50.00%  2
../lib/Net/hostent.t                 6  1536     7    6  85.71%  2-7
../lib/Net/t/hostname.t                          2    1  50.00%  1
lib/os2_process.t                    5  1280   227    5   2.20%  80 85 94 174
                                                                 209
lib/os2_process_kid.t                          227    5   2.20%  80 85 94 174
                                                                 209
lib/rx_cmprt.t                     255 65280    18    3  16.67%  16-18
op/fork.t                                       18    1   5.56%  2
run/fresh_perl.t                                95    1   1.05%  91
69 tests and 559 subtests skipped.



It took over two hours to get to this point.


 
> Sebastian


-- 
John


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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:44:13 +0100
From:  csaba.raduly at sophos.com
Subject:  Re:  cc


On 15/07/2002 14:23:21 owner-os2-unix wrote:

[snip]
>
>Anyone else want to try this? :-
>
>
> at echo off
>echo #include ^<stdlib.h^>>>cc.c
                           ^^
The first line should be an overwrite, rather than an append, i.e.
echo #include ^<stdlib.h^> >cc.c

This will allow running the cmd multiple times without ending up
with a number of main functions.

>echo #include ^<unistd.h^>>>cc.c
>echo.>>cc.c
>echo int main(int argc, char *argv[])>>cc.c
>echo {>>cc.c
>echo         argv[0] = "gcc";>>cc.c
>echo         return execvp(argv[0], argv) ? EXIT_FAILURE :
>EXIT_SUCCESS;>>cc.c
>echo }>>cc.c
>gcc cc.c -Zcrtdll -Zomf
>
>
>
>Can I do something similar for egrep and fgrep which are basically copies
>of grep? Maybe gawk as well?
>

GNU grep 2.0 comes with three executables called grep, egrep and fgrep,
all 2k in size. They all interchangeable. In fact, they are identical.
"egrep -f" is supposed to act as fgrep and so on.

--
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   16 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 15:23:22 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 08:34:16AM -0500, Maynard wrote:
> Anybody,
> 
> >It would be nice to get a clean build on OS/2 before the final release, so 
> >give it a try if you can.
> 
> I would really appreciate a complete step-by-step-for-dumbasses
> direction for what I need to do from an os/2 command prompt to compile
> and test these.

I thought you had already managed to build Perl 5.6.1...

Building 5.8.0 is just as straightforward. Only a couple of lines 
need to be changed. I posted an updated build_perl.sh in an earlier msg.

NB I'm referring to RC2, BTW. I didn't have much success with RC3.
 
> I have the distribution unpacked, and John's baseline deployed, but
> probably need to fix path and libpath and any other environment
> appropriate to running sh.
> 
> I have some linux console experience, and programmed/compiled Borland
> Pascal through BP7, but I find myself at a complete loss without
> compass on this project just now.

I don't understand this. You have already built Perl AFAICS.
 
> Thanks a bunch,
> 
> 	`~Maynard


-- 
John


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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 16:02:31 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 11:06:07AM -0300, lordspigol wrote:

> This thing of compiling Unix projects on OS/2 is a hell. :(
> 
> I already compiled some programs on Linux & find it a pita.

It's supposed to be a doddle on Linux....

It always says you just need to run 'configure and Make'. Everything you 
need is already in place.

On OS/2, we are trying to put all the prerequisites in place. 
 
> But I need learn compiling something otherwise I will not
> be able have news utilities, so needed in our OS2 world.

Which news utilities?


 
> Thanks by reading,
> Rod, Brasil


-- 
John


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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 17:32:18 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:   Ogg Vorbis goes gold


I saw a note on TheREG which said Ogg Vorbis had gone gold.

Wondered if the OS/2 port would be availble soon... 


-- 
John


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

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:24:08 +0100
From:  csaba.raduly at sophos.com
Subject:  Re:  cc


On 15/07/2002 11:12:37 owner-os2-unix wrote:

>You said what I already knew. But this really leaves very curious.
>
>Why three identical executable instead only one?
>


Hyst^H^H^Historical reasons. In the beginning there was grep. Then there
was fgrep. Then there was egrep. These were separate programs.

The GNU folks' implementation of [ef]?grep does it with a single
executable. They just tweak the regexp package behaviour an then execute
the same code. In order to accommodate people/scripts who still expect any
one of the mentioned executables, they provide all three.

It is probably a peculiarity of the OS/2 port to provide three executables
and a DLL to do the real job.
(on a Linux system, these three are ALL symlinks to /bin/egrep)

--
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   20 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:27:48 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  cc

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 11:12:37AM -0300, lordspigol wrote:
> You said what I already knew. But this really leaves very curious.
> 
> Why three indentical executable instead only one?

On Unix egrep and fgrep are symbolically linked to grep, but we don't have 
the luxury of doing this on OS/2.
 
> Rod
> 
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:44:13 +0100, csaba.raduly at sophos.com wrote:
> 
> >GNU grep 2.0 comes with three executables called grep, egrep and fgrep,
> >all 2k in size. They all interchangeable. In fact, they are identical.
> >"egrep -f" is supposed to act as fgrep and so on.


-- 
John



**= Email   21 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:44:05 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  novice orientation

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 10:34:09AM -0500, Maynard wrote:
> 
> I was expecting an interactive session after running 'sh' and receiving
> the '#' prompt; that isn't working here, but running the .sh file from
> a .cmd file has started the process.

That is how I have set it up. The alternative is to put everything you 
need into the shell script and run that using:-

sh SHELLSCRIPTNAME
 
> For debugging I prefer "one step at a time", so I thought I'd sit at
> the shell prompt and issue instructions as found in the .sh file; which
> would be a lot less awkward than modifying the .sh file between runs
> and re-executing the .cmd file.

I would guess that running the shell script for building Perl, one step at 
a time would take weeks... 

At the moment you should have a log of what has happened, so you can 
always follow things subsequently.

 
> --
> Maynard


-- 
John



**= Email   22 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 20:47:02 +0100
From:  John Poltorak <jp at eyup.org>
Subject:  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 01:32:40PM +0100, John Poltorak wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 09:24:50AM +0100, John Poltorak wrote:
> > 
> > There's an announcement for RC3 of Perl 5.8.0 here:-
> > 
> > http://www.iki.fi/jhi/5.8.0-RC3-anno
> > 
> > 
> > I haven't tried it myself yet, but I think a number of things relating to 
> > OS/2 have been changed.
> > 
> > It would be nice to get a clean build on OS/2 before the final release, so 
> > give it a try if you can.
> 
> After trying it, it seems like a backward step from RC2. With RC2 I was 
> able to build it and run the tests. RC3 ended up with plenty of 
> compilation errors.

It appears that the fix which was put in specifically to get round the 
'malloc' problems doesn't work. So if you do want to give it a try you 
should change line 40 of makedef.pl to make this test fail:-

my $exportperlmalloc = $PLATFORM eq 'os2';

ie:-

my $exportperlmalloc = $PLATFORM eq 'osx';


Here is the summary of the harness tests:-


Failed 20/726 test scripts, 97.25% okay. 95/68186 subtests failed, 99.86% okay.
Failed Test                       Stat Wstat Total Fail  Failed  List of Failed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
../ext/DB_File/t/db-btree.t          0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../ext/DB_File/t/db-hash.t           0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../ext/DB_File/t/db-recno.t          0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../ext/IO/lib/IO/t/io_multihomed.  255 65280     8    8 100.00%  1-8
../ext/IO/lib/IO/t/io_sock.t       255 65280    20   20 100.00%  1-20
../ext/IO/lib/IO/t/io_udp.t        255 65280     7    7 100.00%  1-7
../ext/Socket/Socket.t              29  7424    16   15  93.75%  2-16
../lib/AnyDBM_File.t                 0    15    12   12 100.00%  1-12
../lib/ExtUtils/t/Mkbootstrap.t      1   256    18    1   5.56%  8
../lib/ExtUtils/t/Packlist.t         1   256    34    1   2.94%  17
../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t            1   256    17    1   5.88%  14
../lib/Memoize/t/errors.t            0    15    11    8  72.73%  4-11
../lib/Memoize/t/tie.t               0    15    ??   ??       %  ??
../lib/Net/Ping/t/110_icmp_inst.t  255 65280     2    1  50.00%  2
../lib/Net/hostent.t                 6  1536     7    6  85.71%  2-7
../lib/Net/t/hostname.t                          2    1  50.00%  1
lib/os2_process.t                    5  1280   227    5   2.20%  80 85 94 174
                                                                 209
lib/os2_process_kid.t                          227    5   2.20%  80 85 94 174
                                                                 209
lib/rx_cmprt.t                     255 65280    18    3  16.67%  16-18
run/fresh_perl.t                                97    1   1.03%  91
69 tests and 560 subtests skipped.



It would be nice to get some of these cracked...


-- 
John


**= Email   23 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 15 Jul 2002 22:18:24 -0300 (ADT)
From:  "lordspigol" <spigol at hotpop.com>
Subject:  Re:  Perl 5.8.0 RC3

On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 16:02:31 +0100, John Poltorak wrote:

>
>It's supposed to be a doddle on Linux....
>
>It always says you just need to run 'configure and Make'. Everything you 
>need is already in place.

But even in the Linux it does not says what it need *before* compile.

After 40 minutes of compiling it says that need a later version of something. =-)

>On OS/2, we are trying to put all the prerequisites in place. 

I guess the problem of lack of a little readme saying what packages
& versions of these packages are needed, it will happen again.

>> But I need learn compiling something otherwise I will not
>> be able have news utilities, so needed in our OS2 world.
>
>Which news utilities?
>

I want compile some utils that a brazilian site have, but before
I need handle well all this proccess. Network related-stuff. Utils
for security like anti-sniffer & things so.

Rod