Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 00:04:05 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 292 ************************************************** Wednesday 21 January 2004 Number 292 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Compiling Tidy : Christian Hennecke" 2 Re: Compiling Tidy : Steven Levine" 3 Re: Compiling Tidy : Christian Hennecke" 4 Re: Compiling Tidy : Steven Levine" 5 Re: Compiling Tidy : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 21:44:43 +0100 (CET) From: "Christian Hennecke" Subject: Re: Compiling Tidy On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 21:24:47 -0800, Steven Levine wrote: >Stefan's platfrom.h fixes will definitely get you past the missing >definitions for ulong and uint. Yep! >Now that I'm back and recovered from our SCOUG meeting, I took a quick >look at the source. I didn't see any other obvious build breakers. gcc didn't like setmode() with _O_BINARY. Removing the leading underscore cured the problem. :-) >You might want to consider using ifdefs in the makefile to support the >OS/2 specific build options. Perhaps we can convince the Tidy maintainers >to add your updates to the Sourceforge codebase. I think I should be able to do this, if you tell me how to modify the makefile. Any special options that should be included besides -Zexe? Christian Hennecke **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 13:49:56 -0800 From: "Steven Levine" Subject: Re: Compiling Tidy In <200401202044.UAA107.02 at mail.warpix.org>, on 01/20/04 at 09:44 PM, "Christian Hennecke" said: >>You might want to consider using ifdefs in the makefile to support the >>OS/2 specific build options. Perhaps we can convince the Tidy maintainers >>to add your updates to the Sourceforge codebase. >I think I should be able to do this, if you tell me how to modify the >makefile. Any special options that should be included besides -Zexe? I should be asking you this since you did the makefile.os2 for the last tidy build. :-) I prefer not to use -Zexe. Instead if prefer to define variables: ifdef OS2 EXENAME = $(PROJECT).exe else EXENAME = $(PROJECT) endif Keep in mind that for the SourceForge project to accept this, the mods are going to need to going into configure.in amd makefile.am. An alternative is to add a build/os2 subudirectory and put the OS/2 makefile there. Unfortunately, I'm not the best guy to ask about this stuff. I know how it works, but I don't do it enough to be good at it and to really understand the tradeoffs. Regards, Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Steven Levine" MR2/ICE 2.41 #10183 Warp4/FP15/14.093c_W4 www.scoug.com irc.webbnet.info irc.fyrelizard.org #scoug (Wed 7pm PST) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:40:37 +0100 (CET) From: "Christian Hennecke" Subject: Re: Compiling Tidy On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 13:49:56 -0800, Steven Levine wrote: >>I think I should be able to do this, if you tell me how to modify the >>makefile. Any special options that should be included besides -Zexe? > >I should be asking you this since you did the makefile.os2 for the last >tidy build. :-) > >I prefer not to use -Zexe. Instead if prefer to define variables: > >ifdef OS2 >EXENAME = $(PROJECT).exe >else >EXENAME = $(PROJECT) >endif I don't think that's a good idea, because the above will result in more modifications to the makefile being required. The maintainers will be probably ask why I want to change three or four statements in a complicated way when one change would suffice. Christian Hennecke **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 19:31:05 -0800 From: "Steven Levine" Subject: Re: Compiling Tidy In <200401210240.CAA118.66 at mail.warpix.org>, on 01/21/04 at 03:40 AM, "Christian Hennecke" said: >I don't think that's a good idea, because the above will result in more >modifications to the makefile being required. The maintainers will be >probably ask why I want to change three or four statements in a >complicated way when one change would suffice. OK. Why not just email Terry Teague and see what he has to say? Regards, Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Steven Levine" MR2/ICE 2.41 #10183 Warp4/FP15/14.093c_W4 www.scoug.com irc.webbnet.info irc.fyrelizard.org #scoug (Wed 7pm PST) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:13:47 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Compiling Tidy On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:40:37AM +0100, Christian Hennecke wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 13:49:56 -0800, Steven Levine wrote: > > >>I think I should be able to do this, if you tell me how to modify the > >>makefile. Any special options that should be included besides -Zexe? > > > >I should be asking you this since you did the makefile.os2 for the last > >tidy build. :-) > > > >I prefer not to use -Zexe. Instead if prefer to define variables: > > > >ifdef OS2 > >EXENAME = $(PROJECT).exe > >else > >EXENAME = $(PROJECT) > >endif > > I don't think that's a good idea, because the above will result in more > modifications to the makefile being required. The maintainers will be > probably ask why I want to change three or four statements in a > complicated way when one change would suffice. Why doesn't it work if you run Autoconf and Configure to create the Makefile in the first place? Nowadays many apps build transparently on OS/2 because of changes made to Autoonf over recent years > Christian Hennecke > -- John