Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:04:04 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 300 ************************************************** Friday 27 February 2004 Number 300 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 RE: Innotek gcc update : Dave Webster 2 Innotek PM support level : Dave Webster 3 Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 : Knut St. Osmundsen" 4 Re: Innotek PM support level : Knut St. Osmundsen" **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:50:16 -0600 From: Dave Webster Subject: RE: Innotek gcc update Works well when actually executed inside a Unix shell. -----Original Message----- From: Dave and Natalie [mailto:dave_yeo at paralynx.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 5:20 PM To: os2-unix at mail.warpix.org Subject: RE: Innotek gcc update On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:55:48 -0600, Dave Webster wrote: > As for bk-deps, once again, I wouldn't know where to >start. A good start might be to copy it to bk-deps.cmd and add extproc sh as the first line. sh can be the full path, eg f:\usr\bin\sh.exe or f:\usr\bin\ash.exe. Cmd.exe will then load sh to run the script Dave **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:08:02 -0600 From: Dave Webster Subject: Innotek PM support level I asked this of Knut on the Innotek support forum, but maybe someone here knows as well. I currently have the 4.5 PM Toolkit and need that level as a minimum. Does anyone have any idea what version level of the internal Innotek PM stuff is? Need to know if I should define USE_TOOLKIT_HEADERS and link in OS2386.lib from the V4.5 Toolkit or if just using the default internal stuff is OK. **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:52:59 +0100 From: "Knut St. Osmundsen" Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 Henry Sobotka wrote: > A problem with emxomfar. Fed foo.o and bar/foo.o, where foo.o contains > foo() and bar/foo.o contains bar(), emxomfar croaks with "Symbol > multiply defined: foo!" (referring to foo.o, not foo()). ar has no such > problem, but then feeding foobar.a to emxomf results in the same > failure. Is that fixable? A while back I tried finding where in the > emxomfar srcs the module name gets processed, but to no avail. Yeah, I've both heard this and seen it. I don't know if it's something I should change or not as I haven't looked into it yet. It appeares that emxomfar creates some symbol out of the object name, and having duplicate symbols in an OMF lib doesn't work. EM did this long ago. I can't promise to look into the at once, but I'll keep it in mind for a later release. In the mean time just use multiple libraries or unique source names... (probably easier said than done) Kind Regards, knut **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:48:25 +0100 From: "Knut St. Osmundsen" Subject: Re: Innotek PM support level Dave Webster wrote: > I asked this of Knut on the Innotek support forum, but maybe someone > here knows as well. I currently have the 4.5 PM Toolkit and need > that level as a minimum. Does anyone have any idea what version > level of the internal Innotek PM stuff is? Need to know if I should > define USE_TOOLKIT_HEADERS and link in OS2386.lib from the V4.5 > Toolkit or if just using the default internal stuff is OK. I don't think linking with os2386.lib would be necessary, I think I got all the exports in os2.lib, even some private one only found in os2386p.lib. As for the state of the PM stuff, that's more questionable, the task of updating os2emx.h isn't closed yet and I have not yet payed attention to the PM part of it. But, I would be more than happy to receive patches or indications on what's missing. I do no thing anything which is already there is wrong because EM did a quite respectable job on os2emx.h imho. Try without USE_TOOLKIT_HEADERS and see if the build stops (because it should be stopping if something's missing). Kind Regards, knut