From: UnixOS2 Archive To: "UnixOS2 Archive" Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:15:44 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 243 ************************************************** Sunday 16 November 2003 Number 243 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 mdate-sh : John Poltorak 2 Re: mdate-sh : Andreas Buening 3 Re: mdate-sh : John Poltorak 4 std::min? : Andrea Venturoli 5 struct udpiphdr : John Poltorak 6 Re: expat : John Poltorak 7 creating intl/Makefile : John Poltorak 8 Re: Automake problem : Dave and Natalie" 9 Re: Automake problem : John Poltorak 10 Re: Automake problem : Dave and Natalie" **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:01:11 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: mdate-sh mdate-sh from automake 1.76 is not working correctly for me... [U:\unixos2\workdir\sed-3.02\doc]>ls -l sed.1 -rw-rw---a 8253 May 31 1998 sed.1 [U:\unixos2\workdir\sed-3.02\doc]>sh -x mdate-sh sed.1 + LANG=C + export LANG + LC_ALL=C + export LC_ALL + LC_TIME=C + export LC_TIME + save_arg1=sed.1 + ls -L /dev/null + > /dev/null + 2>&1 + ls_command=ls -l -d + ls -l -d / + set - xdrwxrwx--- 0 invalid date / mdate-sh[79]: shift: nothing to shift Is this a SHELL problem? It works fine on a different system... What am I doing wrong? -- John **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:39:17 +0100 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: mdate-sh John Poltorak wrote: > > mdate-sh from automake 1.76 is not working correctly for me... > > [U:\unixos2\workdir\sed-3.02\doc]>ls -l sed.1 > > -rw-rw---a 8253 May 31 1998 sed.1 > > [U:\unixos2\workdir\sed-3.02\doc]>sh -x mdate-sh sed.1 > > + LANG=C > + export LANG > + LC_ALL=C > + export LC_ALL > + LC_TIME=C > + export LC_TIME > + save_arg1=sed.1 > + ls -L /dev/null > + > /dev/null > + 2>&1 > + ls_command=ls -l -d > + ls -l -d / > + set - xdrwxrwx--- 0 invalid date / This should look like + set - xdrwxrwxhs- 0 Feb 18 2002 / which is the output of 'ls -l -d /' Bye, Andreas **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 09:59:46 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: mdate-sh On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 12:39:17AM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote: > John Poltorak wrote: > > > > mdate-sh from automake 1.76 is not working correctly for me... > > > > [U:\unixos2\workdir\sed-3.02\doc]>ls -l sed.1 > > > > -rw-rw---a 8253 May 31 1998 sed.1 > > > > [U:\unixos2\workdir\sed-3.02\doc]>sh -x mdate-sh sed.1 > > > > + LANG=C > > + export LANG > > + LC_ALL=C > > + export LC_ALL > > + LC_TIME=C > > + export LC_TIME > > + save_arg1=sed.1 > > + ls -L /dev/null > > + > /dev/null > > + 2>&1 > > + ls_command=ls -l -d > > + ls -l -d / > > + set - xdrwxrwx--- 0 invalid date / > > This should look like > + set - xdrwxrwxhs- 0 Feb 18 2002 / > which is the output of 'ls -l -d /' Ahhh... It seems to be a file system problem. I'm using RAMFS and guess I've tripped over a bug. > Bye, > Andreas -- John **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:21:26 EST From: Andrea Venturoli Subject: std::min? ** Reply to note from "Dave and Natalie" Sun, 16 Nov 2003 09:58:10 -0800 > Shouldn't std::min be defined in -lgcc or somesuch? No, it should be a template and as such instantiated and compiled when/where you use it. > I am getting around this with a macro but it doesn't seem like an elegant solution It's not elegant at all and you'll get into problems sooner or later. > Menu.cc:355: no matching function for call to `min (unsigned int &, size_t)' ^^^ ^^^ Here is the problem. The definition should be something like: template std::min(const T&a,const T&b) {...} and you can see that both a and b must be of the same type. In your example, however one is "unsigned int", the other is "size_t", so this template doesn't apply and you have no other available. Cast one of the two; e.g. change std::min(a,b) into something like (*) std::min(static_cast(a),b) or std::min(a,static_cast(b)) (*) It's not guaranteed to work as I wrote it, the exact expression depends on your code (it might be "const size_t", "size_t&", ...) bye av. **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:44:39 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: struct udpiphdr Has anyone come across 'struct udpiphdr'? It is used by traceroute. I've actually found it in traceroute's linux include directory - netinet. Should it be included in Posix/2? -- John **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 13:03:31 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: expat On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 01:51:43AM +0100, Stefan Neis wrote: > On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, John Poltorak wrote: > > > There is a new port of EXPAT (v1.95.6) on Hobbes. > > > > Can anyone make any sense of the included README-expat which shows how it > > can be built from source? > > Actually, it's being used by wxWindows and the original expat package does > apparently build just fine after regenerating the configure script with > autoconf-2.57 I've just tried and it appears to build quite well. The only problem is that xmlwf needs to have emxbind run against it and the build would be complete. Is there any way of specifying some Make flags to do this bit automatically. What I can't figure out is whether all the stuff IlyaZ has done to get it to build is strictly necessary. He seems intent on running his perl script convert_configure to convert the supplied configure script into an OS/2 friendly version, whereas it seems much more appropriate to run autoconf. Am I missing something? > Regards, > Stefan > -- > Micro$oft is not an answer. It is a question. The answer is 'no'. > -- John **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:57:16 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: creating intl/Makefile If the option --without-included-gettext is specified for configure, should intl/Makefile be created? -- John **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:07:12 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Automake problem On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 11:54:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >Do you get warnings like these:- > >WARNING: Using auxiliary files such as `acconfig.h', `config.h.bot' >WARNING: and `config.h.top', to define templates for `config.h.in' >WARNING: is deprecated and discouraged. > >WARNING: Using the third argument of `AC_DEFINE' and >WARNING: `AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED' allows to define a template without >WARNING: `acconfig.h': > >WARNING: AC_DEFINE([NEED_MAIN], 1, >WARNING: [Define if a function `main' is needed.]) > >WARNING: More sophisticated templates can also be produced, see the >WARNING: documentation. > > I got these, I felt they are from fping using old auto tools > >I also get the following errors:- > >configure.in: no proper invocation of AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE was found. >configure.in: You should verify that configure.in invokes AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE, >configure.in: that aclocal.m4 is present in the top-level directory, >configure.in: and that aclocal.m4 was recently regenerated (using aclocal). >configure.in: installing `./missing' >Makefile.am: installing `./depcomp' >/usr/local/share/automake-1.7/am/depend2.am: am__fastdepCC does not appear in AM_CONDITIONAL >/usr/local/share/automake-1.7/am/depend2.am: AMDEP does not appear in AM_CONDITIONAL > > >Looks like an important part of Automake is missing from my setup... Yes, I didn't get these Dave **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:21:16 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Automake problem On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 09:22:33AM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 11:54:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >I haven't had any problems with ftp.gnu.org recently... > > If you go to eg ftp.gnu.org/gnu/texinfo you will see a lot of files ending in > back-RSN.README -> ../../MISSING-FILES > Which start out with > The following files are not available because their authenticity is > being confirmed. We expect to have them uploaded Real Soon Now (RSN). > and a big list of files. > I guess they got cracked and don't know if any files have been compromised I've just been looking through the GNU ftp site and the only affected as far as getting UX2BS up and running is TEXINFO, but since 4.6 is available, I'll see if I can update to that. Everything else required for the initial installation seems to be available. > Dave > -- John **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:20:11 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Automake problem On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:21:16 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >I've just been looking through the GNU ftp site and the only affected as >far as getting UX2BS up and running is TEXINFO, but since 4.6 is >available, I'll see if I can update to that. > >Everything else required for the initial installation seems to be >available. > Hmm, I'll try UX2BS again in the next couple of days Dave