Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 00:04:05 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 317 ************************************************** Wednesday 17 March 2004 Number 317 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 - printf bug? : Knut Stange Osmundsen 2 Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 : Dave and Natalie" 3 Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 : Dave and Natalie" 4 Make 3.80 : John Poltorak 5 Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 : Knut St. Osmundsen" 6 GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 compiling gnuplot (CVS) : Franz Bakan" 7 Re: Make 3.80 : Dave and Natalie" 8 Re: Make 3.80 : John Poltorak 9 Re: Make 3.80 : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 18:30:31 +0100 From: Knut Stange Osmundsen Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 - printf bug? Henry Sobotka wrote: > Knut St. Osmundsen wrote: > >> I've looked at the strrev() code, it looks very ok to me. Guess >> you've fed it a readonly string thus causing the SIGSEGV. > > > Looked ok to me too, so I gather char* s = "foo" is now (I thought > const was the readonly identifier) the same as const char* s = "foo" > (unless -fwrite-strings is used?) because "foo" automatically goes > into the DATA/TEXT segment and becomes readonly, or something like > that? I don't quite recall the details, you better check the GCC 3.2.3 manual for the exact fact. IIRC, for C++ all strings are readonly for sure. For plain C they appares to be too juding from the problem here. So, for the future: char szString[] = "foo"; Kind Regards, knut **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:44:27 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 23:37:54 +0100, Knut St. Osmundsen wrote: >Hi! > >Thers a GCC build have available at: > http://www.innotek.de/products/gccos2/download/ Hi Knut. Noticed there is a conflict between ipc.h (which comes with the shm package http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/pub/os2/system/x11/XFree86/v3.3.1/shm.zip) and include/sys/types.h ipc.h has #if !defined(_KEY_T) #define _KEY_T typedef int key_t; #endif and sys/types.h has #ifndef _KEY_T_DECLARED typedef __key_t key_t; /* IPC key (for Sys V IPC) */ #define _KEY_T_DECLARED #endif I changed the above to #ifndef _KEY_T_DECLARED && ifndef _KEY_T to get around this. Don't know if there is a better solution or perhaps its ipc.h that should be changed Dave **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:42:05 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:44:27 -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: >Hi Knut. Noticed there is a conflict between ipc.h (which comes with the shm package http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/pub/os2/system/x11/XFree86/v3.3.1/shm.zip) and include/sys/types.h Actually a better URL for shm is http://os2ports.com/ftp/pub/os2/unix/xfree86/ports/libs/shm.zip Dave **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:47:09 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Make 3.80 Does make 3.80 build and work correctly on OS/2? Or do we have an OS/2 port of it? -- John **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:35:43 +0100 From: "Knut St. Osmundsen" Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 Dave and Natalie wrote: > Hi Knut. Noticed there is a conflict between ipc.h (which comes with the shm package http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/pub/os2/system/x11/XFree86/v3.3.1/shm.zip) and include/sys/types.h > ipc.h has > #if !defined(_KEY_T) > #define _KEY_T > typedef int key_t; > #endif > > and sys/types.h has > #ifndef _KEY_T_DECLARED > typedef __key_t key_t; /* IPC key (for Sys V IPC) */ > #define _KEY_T_DECLARED > #endif Oops. I'll fix that. Note. That we're actually shipping that sys/ipc.h too :-) > I changed the above to > #ifndef _KEY_T_DECLARED && ifndef _KEY_T You should change it to: #if !defined(_KEY_T_DECLARED) && !defined(_KEY_T) #define _KEY_T > to get around this. Don't know if there is a better solution or > perhaps its ipc.h that should be changed The right solution is that I fix sys/types.h and look very closely at the ipc implementation you've pointed me to before adding those APIS to LIBC. Kind Regards, knut **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:25:22 +0100 (CET) From: "Franz Bakan" Subject: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 compiling gnuplot (CVS) Hi, Trying to compile gnuplot (the current CVS) with Beta 4: The following problems occur: 1. PATH_MAX and MAXPATHLEN #defines are not found. After adding these defines manually I get gnuplot.exe compiled. 2. but the build-process for gnupmdrv.exe fails with: [G:\Dev\gcc\v3.2.2\src\gnuplot\src]make -f ..\config\makefile.os2 \\ gcc -s -Zmt -Zcrtdll -Zbsd-signals -Zomf -o gnupmdrv.exe os2\gnupmdrv.obj \\ os2\gclient.obj os2\print.obj os2\dialogs.obj gpexecute.obj \\ os2\gnupmdrv.res os2\gnupmdrv.def gcc: unrecognized option `-Zbsd-signals' weakld: error: Unresolved symbol (UNDEF) '_fcloseall'. weakld: info: The symbol is referenced by: G:\Dev\gcc\v3.2.2\src\gnuplot\src\os2\gnupmdrv.obj Ignoring unresolved externals reported from weak prelinker. G:\Dev\gcc\v3.2.2\src\gnuplot\src\os2\gnupmdrv.def(1) : warning LNK4072: \\ changing application type from WINDOWCOMPAT to WINDOWAPI G:\Dev\gcc\v3.2.2\src\gnuplot\src\os2\gnupmdrv.def(8) : warning LNK4087: \\ The obsolete keyword HEAPSIZE is ignored G:\Dev\gcc\v3.2.2\src\gnuplot\src\os2\gnupmdrv.obj(gnupmdrv.obj) : \\ error LNK2029: "_fcloseall" : unresolved external How to resolve this? Bye Franz **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 15:42:29 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Make 3.80 On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:47:09 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >Does make 3.80 build and work correctly on OS/2? > >Or do we have an OS/2 port of it? I'm using 3.81rc1 which I think I got here http://unix.os2site.com/sw/pub/binary/make/make-3.81rc1-r3-bin.zip Dave **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:09:42 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Make 3.80 On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 03:42:29PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:47:09 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > > > >Does make 3.80 build and work correctly on OS/2? > > > >Or do we have an OS/2 port of it? > > I'm using 3.81rc1 which I think I got here http://unix.os2site.com/sw/pub/binary/make/make-3.81rc1-r3-bin.zip Ideally I would like a version of Make based on a release version that can be built from source to comply with UX2BS standards. > Dave -- John **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:18:22 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Make 3.80 On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:09:42AM +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 03:42:29PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:47:09 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > > > > > > >Does make 3.80 build and work correctly on OS/2? > > > > > >Or do we have an OS/2 port of it? > > > > I'm using 3.81rc1 which I think I got here http://unix.os2site.com/sw/pub/binary/make/make-3.81rc1-r3-bin.zip > > Ideally I would like a version of Make based on a release version that can > be built from source to comply with UX2BS standards. According to:- http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2004-03/msg00006.html a beta of 3.81 has just come out. Maybe this builds on OS/2... > > Dave -- John