From: UnixOS2 Archive To: "UnixOS2 Archive" Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 04:39:14 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 341 ************************************************** Wednesday 09 October 2002 Number 341 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: How to subscribe? : John Poltorak 2 How to subscribe? : Mentore Siesto 3 Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary : John Poltorak 4 Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary : Lyn St George" 5 Re: gettext / iconv was: Some news : Andreas Buening 6 Re: Latest version of autoconf? : Andreas Buening 7 Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary : Andreas Buening 8 Re: Latest version of autoconf? : Jeff Robinson 9 Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary : Lyn St George" 10 Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary : Andreas Buening 11 Re: gettext / iconv was: Some news : Franz Bakan" **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 09:02:57 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: How to subscribe? On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 09:55:27AM +0200, Mentore Siesto wrote: > Excuse me all, > could you remember me how to subscribe to this ML? A friend of mine is > really interested in Perl developing and I pointed him here. mailto:os2-unix-request at eyup.org?body=subscribe > Thank you, > > Mentore Siesto > Team OS/2 Italia -- John **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 09:55:27 +0200 (CEST) From: Mentore Siesto Subject: How to subscribe? Excuse me all, could you remember me how to subscribe to this ML? A friend of mine is really interested in Perl developing and I pointed him here. Thank you, Mentore Siesto Team OS/2 Italia **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 11:10:23 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 09:28:59PM +0000, Lyn St George wrote: > On Sun, 6 Oct 2002 09:46:33 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > > > > >Can you explain the nature of the additions you need for Interchange? > >Is there any reason not to include those additions in a standard version > >of Perl for OS/2? IMV, it doesn't really make much sense to have several > >versions of the latest Perl. I would like to have a single version which > >works in all circumstances. > > Apparently Interchange installs quite painlessly on Cygwin for Windoze, > whereas it has to be patched to install on Perl/EMX for OS/2. Patching > perl instead makes more sense, if possible, and so the extra #defines > are: > HAS_PASSWD > HAS_GETPWENT > HAS_GETGRID > HAS_GETGRNAM > HAS_GETGRENT > HAS_CRYPT > 'HAS_CHOWN' is the only one left which needs to be implemented (so > as to leave only the 'symlink' function which can be easily patched) in > Interchange. All the above build in without problems, but 'chown' turns > out to need some work, for which I will need to make some time. I have looked at os2ish.h and it already has:- HAS_PASSWD HAS_GETGRENT so I'm not exactly sure of the changes you are making. Could you send a diff file? > - > Cheers > Lyn St George > +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > + http://www.zolotek.net .. eCommerce hosting, consulting > + http://www.os2docs.org .. some 'How To' stuff ... > +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- John **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:17:48 +0000 From: "Lyn St George" Subject: Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 11:10:23 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > >I have looked at os2ish.h and it already has:- > >HAS_PASSWD >HAS_GETGRENT > >so I'm not exactly sure of the changes you are making. Could you send a >diff file? Just checked the original, and yes. Plainly it is the others which are extra. - Cheers Lyn St George +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + http://www.zolotek.net .. eCommerce hosting, consulting + http://www.os2docs.org .. some 'How To' stuff ... +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:04:36 +0200 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: gettext / iconv was: Some news Franz Bakan wrote: > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:52:58 +0200 (CEST), andreas.buening at nexgo.de wrote: > > ... > >> >gettext 0.11.2 beta > >> >Uses iconv2 (statically linked) and libunixos2. It's more a proof > >> >of concept than a fully featured package. :-) > > > >[error messages] > > > >Thanks. I'll have a look at it as soon I have some time. > > Besides the SIGSEGV I get a warning when I use (your) gettext 0.11.2 > built with the 'OS/2-api-small version' of iconv: > > msgfmt: : warning: Charset "ISO-8859-15" is not supported. msgfmt relies > on iconv(), and iconv() does not support "ISO-8859-15". > Installing GNU libiconv and then reinstalling GNU gettext > would fix this problem. Continuing anyway. It seems that OS/2 doesn't support iso-8859-15. Under which circumstances did you get this message? [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 Mordor where the Shadows lie. **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:04:46 +0200 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: Latest version of autoconf? Jeff Robinson wrote: > > What is the latest version of autoconf available for OS/2? > > Or perhaps a better way to phrase it is, what is the latest "binary" > version of autoconf for OS/2? autoconf is just a set of shell scripts that use hardcoded paths that are determined at "compile" time. So there is no "binary" version. What I'd like to have is a small tool that scans (may be with online assistance by the maintainer) a prefix directory for all files that are 1) text files and 2) contain hardcoded paths. Then the following should be done: a) The file name is added to a database of "scripts that contain hardcoded paths" which is stored somewhere in /var. b) An arbitrary drive letter x: is prepended to all these paths. c) After that all files in the prefix tree are stored into an UnixOS/2 package file (by another tool). This you could call a "binary" package. d) pkginstall puts the files into the UNIXROOT tree e) Yet another tool replaces the arbitrary drive letter x: the real UNIXROOT drive. > I've found autoconf 2.53b on Hobbes, [snip] > Anybody have any pointers/suggestions as far as getting a working > autoconf into place? What exactly is your problem? 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 Mordor where the Shadows lie. **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:04:55 +0200 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary Thomas Hoffmann wrote: > > On usenet I read some minutes ago: > > .... > On Sat, 20 Jul 2002 11:49:09 UTC, John Poltorak wrote: > > > Perl 5.8.0 has just been released, and thanks to some last minute > > changes, builds pretty well on OS/2. > .... > > What about providing a pre-built Perl 5.8.0 for people that just would > like to > use this sofware for building other stuff (vs. people that are after > permanent "proofs of concept")? And if this binary distro would fit into > the frame of FHS, this would even be better. > > Just dreaming ....;-) To my knowledge the problem is that perl uses hardcoded paths that are determined at compile time and provides some env. vars. that can be used to override them at run time. This means every binary compilation uses at most one specific drive unless you use those env. vars. If you don't want to use those env. vars. and you don't want to provide 24 different binary compilations (for C:-Z:) then you have to patch the code so that it cares about UNIXROOT. :-( 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 Mordor where the Shadows lie. **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:15:24 -0500 From: Jeff Robinson Subject: Re: Latest version of autoconf? Andreas Buening wrote: > Jeff Robinson wrote: > >>What is the latest version of autoconf available for OS/2? >> >>Or perhaps a better way to phrase it is, what is the latest "binary" >>version of autoconf for OS/2? > > > autoconf is just a set of shell scripts that use hardcoded paths that > are determined at "compile" time. So there is no "binary" version. > What I'd like to have is a small tool that scans (may be with online > assistance by the maintainer) a prefix directory for all files that are > 1) text files and 2) contain hardcoded paths. Then the following > should be done: > a) The file name is added to a database of "scripts that contain > hardcoded paths" which is stored somewhere in /var. > b) An arbitrary drive letter x: is prepended to all these paths. > c) After that all files in the prefix tree are stored into an UnixOS/2 > package file (by another tool). This you could call a "binary" > package. > d) pkginstall puts the files into the UNIXROOT tree > e) Yet another tool replaces the arbitrary drive letter x: the > real UNIXROOT drive. > My "binary" comment was sort've based on what I had seen of an earlier autoconf that didn't require me to do anything other than set a few environmental variables to get it to run. Or at least I think it did. It's been a long time since I installed it. Either way, that's neither here nor there, I s'pose. > > >>I've found autoconf 2.53b on Hobbes, > > > [snip] > > >>Anybody have any pointers/suggestions as far as getting a working >>autoconf into place? > > > What exactly is your problem? > > I've managed to work out what some of the errors were that I was seeing. I was continually getting a sed error when it was trying to write to my temp directory, siting it as e:tmp/foo I found that I had the environmental variable TMPDIR set to e:\tmp so I was losing the slash. That one was fixed easily enough. Now I can successfully complete the configure portion of getting autoconf up and running, but the make portion is still unhappy. The system is desperately wanting me to have /bin/sh available, though that isn't where I keep it. I've tried setting both SHELL and EMXSHELL to the proper values, the make process still looks for /bin/sh. Ah, wait. I see now that /bin/sh is being called by GNUmakefile and and makefile. Fixing that seems to get me further, though the build finally fails with: [KILGORE|e:/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b]gmake Making all in bin gmake.exe[1]: Entering directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/bin' gmake.exe[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'. gmake.exe[1]: Leaving directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/bin' Making all in tests gmake.exe[1]: Entering directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/tests' gmake.exe[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'. gmake.exe[1]: Leaving directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/tests' Making all in . gmake.exe[1]: Entering directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b' Making install in bin gmake.exe[2]: Entering directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/bin' gmake.exe[3]: Entering directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/bin' gmake.exe[3]: :: Command not found gmake.exe[3]: Nothing to be done for `install-data-am'. gmake.exe[3]: Leaving directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/bin' gmake.exe[2]: *** [install-am] Error 1 gmake.exe[2]: Leaving directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b/bin' gmake.exe[1]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 gmake.exe[1]: Leaving directory `/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b' gmake: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 [KILGORE|e:/temp_ac/autoconf-2.53b] I'll probably continue working at this, to see what else I can come up with. Jeff -- ---------------- Whatza JamochaMUD? http://jamochamud.anecho.mb.ca Or other stuff: http://www.anecho.mb.ca/~jeffnik ----------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:28:58 +0000 From: "Lyn St George" Subject: Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:04:55 +0200, Andreas Buening wrote: > >To my knowledge the problem is that perl uses hardcoded paths >that are determined at compile time and provides some env. >vars. that can be used to override them at run time. >This means every binary compilation uses at most one specific >drive unless you use those env. vars. If you don't want to >use those env. vars. and you don't want to provide 24 different >binary compilations (for C:-Z:) then you have to patch the >code so that it cares about UNIXROOT. :-( This has always been the traditional way to build Perl for OS/2, but it's not necessary. It is possible to build Perl with just /usr as the root prefix (which is how I do it), but of course this means that you need to use it from the same drive on which it's installed (otherwise you get "foo not in at INC" errors). If the prefix is just '/usr', then this should go on top of your UNIXROOT (mine is just 'f:') - Cheers Lyn St George +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + http://www.zolotek.net .. eCommerce hosting, consulting + http://www.os2docs.org .. some 'How To' stuff ... +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 21:27:48 +0200 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: Perl 5.8.0 binary Lyn St George wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:04:55 +0200, Andreas Buening wrote: > > > > >To my knowledge the problem is that perl uses hardcoded paths > >that are determined at compile time and provides some env. > >vars. that can be used to override them at run time. > >This means every binary compilation uses at most one specific > >drive unless you use those env. vars. If you don't want to > >use those env. vars. and you don't want to provide 24 different > >binary compilations (for C:-Z:) then you have to patch the > >code so that it cares about UNIXROOT. :-( > > This has always been the traditional way to build Perl for > OS/2, but it's not necessary. It is possible to build Perl with > just /usr as the root prefix (which is how I do it), but of course > this means that you need to use it from the same drive on > which it's installed (otherwise you get "foo not in at INC" > errors). If the prefix is just '/usr', then this should go on top of > your UNIXROOT (mine is just 'f:') Even this is in general unacceptable. Not everybody has a x GB partition where he can put really everything from system tools and development stuff to sources and test installations. If your UNIXROOT is f:, but you want to have a test installation of the newest betas on h: then you have a problem because in this case you need two perl installations and you have to change LIBPATH at run time! But it's even worse: perl checks e.g. for the shell at compile time in your PATH and uses the first occurrence of sh.exe. I bet your sh.exe is at another place than mine. 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 Mordor where the Shadows lie. **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 23:37:57 +0200 (CEST) From: "Franz Bakan" Subject: Re: gettext / iconv was: Some news On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:04:36 +0200, Andreas Buening wrote: ... >> msgfmt: : warning: Charset "ISO-8859-15" is not supported. msgfmt relies >> on iconv(), and iconv() does not support "ISO-8859-15". >> Installing GNU libiconv and then reinstalling GNU gettext >> would fix this problem. Continuing anyway. > >It seems that OS/2 doesn't support iso-8859-15. Under which >circumstances did you get this message? While compiling (the CVS-Version of) Sane. I get this warning-message when the .po - file contains the following line: "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15\n" and the the command is for example either msgmerge umax_pp.de.po.old umax_pp.pot -o umax_pp.de.po or ... | msgfmt -o umax_pp.de.mo - (where ... is a construct of cat and awk, but that's not important) Franz