From: UnixOS2 Archive To: "UnixOS2 Archive" Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:14:06 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 224 ************************************************** Monday 27 October 2003 Number 224 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Re: [Ux2bs] Innotek LIBC : Dave and Natalie" 2 Building Python : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:03:34 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Re: [Ux2bs] Innotek LIBC On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 16:05:23 +0100, Knut St. Osmundsen wrote: >Now, have anyone actually tried GCC/LIBC beta2 by now? Any suggestions, >problems, ideas, contributions? I notice that AZs libiconv is now distributed with your (Innoteks) libc as only static libraries unlike with GCC3.2.1 where it came as a DLL. Considering the small size of this lib and the fact that GNU libiconv is needed for quite a few things (and a version or 2 back even produced an OS/2 DLL thru the usual configure + make procedure) such as libintl I hope that you keep it as only a static package Dave **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 23:57:37 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Building Python I have looked at the Python emx src package on Hobbes and don't see any patches for OS/2. Does that mean no patches are required to the original source for v2.3.2? -- John