Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 00:04:04 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 320 ************************************************** Saturday 20 March 2004 Number 320 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: RPM : Adrian Gschwend" 2 Re: RPM : Adrian Gschwend" 3 Re: RPM : John Poltorak 4 Re: RPM : billn 5 Re: RPM : Adrian Gschwend" 6 Re: Sorry for a dumb question : Steve Wendt" 7 Re: RPM : billn 8 Re: Sorry for a dumb question : Stefan Neis 9 Re: Sorry for a dumb question : Dave and Natalie" 10 TCL : Jack Troughton 11 Re: TCL : John Poltorak 12 Re: TCL : Henry Sobotka 13 Re: Fluxbox and unresolved symbols : Dave and Natalie" 14 Re: Sorry for a dumb question : Steve Wendt 15 Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 compiling gnuplot (CVS) : Franz Bakan" 16 Posix/2 and Innotek gcc : John Poltorak 17 Re: TCL : Jack Troughton 18 Re: Posix/2 and Innotek gcc : Stefan Neis 19 Re: Posix/2 and Innotek gcc : Stefan Neis 20 Building gcc 3.2.2 : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:43:36 +0100 (CET) From: "Adrian Gschwend" Subject: Re: RPM On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:20:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >We have discussed package managers before on this list and ISTR that the >one used by Slackware was as good as any... I have no clue which one they use. RPM and the one of Debian are those that are used in most cases. And they definitely both have the most features and are very good documented. Also I don't really look for a unixos2 packet manager at the moment, I am interested in something for OS/2 and eCS in general. >What I am looking for is a way of creating packages from the original >source. I can build quite a number using UX2BS, but I would like to build >packages for distribution as an alternative to installing them, but have >no idea how to set about it. I guess I need some target like 'make >package'. I wondered how this was handled in the creation of RPMs... search the web, the RPM documentation is very good. You will find step-by-step guides how to build such stuff from source. >EMX is so firmly established that you would be unable to replace it for >many years. There are already so many conflicts because of different I do not agree. EMX is a POS regarding maintenance and many ports out there are ugly hacks that rely on EMX. The approach of Innotek LIBC (well, Knuts approach) is to compile as much as possible with as few changes as possible in the original source. So if LIBC does not yet provide what we need we rather should invest time into LIBC than into some weird diffs that noone can maintain in the future. >compilers, headers, libs, dlls etc that a replacement for EMX would be >difficult to manage. Also with Innotek's LIBC, I'm not keen on having to >change my version every couple of months. In my opinion this is really the wrong way to go. For sure it's for the moment the easier way but you will end up nowhere IMHO. Knut did excellent work so far and as soon as Gentoo Linux relesases their new portage-ng system, I will try to set up a bootstrap like you did with gcc 2.x and EMX based on portage-ng: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/portage-ng/systemspec.xml I am using gentoo for some time now (after beeing a long time user of Debian) and I have to say that this is by far the most advanced ports-based system I know (I know FreeBSD & OpenBSD ports as well). Portage-ng should be much easier to port to other platforms (the current one is not really portable). BTW Knut did release a proposal about a fresh implementation of fork() for Innotek LIBC, there are people who have a look at that and as soon as we have that implemented, I see no more reason for EMX. For sure there is still work to do even with fork but that's the way to go IMHO. Sorry for all those IMHO's, I don't want to start a religous war here. I really appreciate your work but if for you EMX is the way to go I will choose another one as soon as possible. So far I use unixos2 because it's the most comfortable system we have for sure. cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend at netlabs.org ktk [a t] netlabs.org ------- Free Software for OS/2 and eCS http://www.netlabs.org **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:52:14 +0100 (CET) From: "Adrian Gschwend" Subject: Re: RPM On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:41:51 +0100 (CET), Stefan Neis wrote: >But it's limitations with respect to C++ support become more and more of >a problem, so if we want to compile current C++ code, there's not much >be can do but replace it... [...] >Once "all" features are implemented, the change rate should go back to >normal. Actually, I even prefer getting a new versions every couple of >months over _never_ getting a new feature included (stdint.h and similar >stuff). full ACK cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend at netlabs.org ktk [a t] netlabs.org ------- Free Software for OS/2 and eCS http://www.netlabs.org **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:39:15 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: RPM On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 01:43:36PM +0100, Adrian Gschwend wrote: > On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:20:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >EMX is so firmly established that you would be unable to replace it for > >many years. There are already so many conflicts because of different > > I do not agree. EMX is a POS regarding maintenance and many ports out > there are ugly hacks that rely on EMX. The thing you must realise is that there are a great many ports out there. They have accumulated over 10 years and it is not a trivial task to replace them. > The approach of Innotek LIBC > (well, Knuts approach) is to compile as much as possible with as few > changes as possible in the original source. So if LIBC does not yet > provide what we need we rather should invest time into LIBC than into > some weird diffs that noone can maintain in the future. Yes, I agree with this approach. The fewer OS/2 specific patches the better as far as I am concerned. It means we are not dependent on the goodwill of a porter who may suddenly lose interest in OS/2. > >compilers, headers, libs, dlls etc that a replacement for EMX would be > >difficult to manage. Also with Innotek's LIBC, I'm not keen on having to > >change my version every couple of months. > > In my opinion this is really the wrong way to go. For sure it's for the > moment the easier way but you will end up nowhere IMHO. Knut did > excellent work so far and as soon as Gentoo Linux relesases their new > portage-ng system, I will try to set up a bootstrap like you did with > gcc 2.x and EMX based on portage-ng: EMX is only in UX2BS because it works well with many apps. My main concern is establishing a standard build framework. Hopefully, in due course, EMX can be replaced but the framework can continue being useful for building apps in an automated fashion. > Sorry for all those IMHO's, I don't want to start a religous war here. > I really appreciate your work but if for you EMX is the way to go I > will choose another one as soon as possible. So far I use unixos2 > because it's the most comfortable system we have for sure. I don't have a strong feeling about EMX, having a build framework which is capable of building any open source progam on OS/2 automatically without much fuss is what I'm bothered about most. The tools which fit into that framework can be changed as and when better versions are available. At the moment there are too many options to make a clear choice about an upgrade path. > cu > > Adrian > > > -- > Adrian Gschwend > at netlabs.org > > ktk [a t] netlabs.org > ------- > Free Software for OS/2 and eCS > http://www.netlabs.org > -- John **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 07:52:56 -0800 From: billn Subject: Re: RPM This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------DABA6E1D2EF6F7558C4991A4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As an outside observer with a long time in the computer business, I'd like to add my $.02 worth. I think EMX was used simply because that was the best way to go when it appeared that OS/2 had reached EoL. When Serenity-Systems brought out eCS, that was a signal for much longer term support, and changed the playing field. Now it is reasonable to take a longer term look, and I agree that LIBC with fewest source mods is the right way to go because in the longer term, that will make the best tool with the least maintenence. Ditto for a new package builder and installer. Has anyone contacted Serenity-Systems to see what their plans are, and how you could work cooperatively? It's a classic alligator and swamp situation. Remember what the long term objective is. :-} BillN http://www.billswrite.com Adrian Gschwend wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:41:51 +0100 (CET), Stefan Neis wrote: > > >But it's limitations with respect to C++ support become more and more of > >a problem, so if we want to compile current C++ code, there's not much > >be can do but replace it... > [...] > >Once "all" features are implemented, the change rate should go back to > >normal. Actually, I even prefer getting a new versions every couple of > >months over _never_ getting a new feature included (stdint.h and similar > >stuff). > > full ACK > > cu > > Adrian > > -- > Adrian Gschwend > at netlabs.org > > ktk [a t] netlabs.org > ------- > Free Software for OS/2 and eCS > http://www.netlabs.org --------------DABA6E1D2EF6F7558C4991A4 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="billn.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for billn Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="billn.vcf" begin:vcard n:Nicholls;Bill x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.billswrite.com org:BW Services adr:;;;Yelm;WA;98597;USA version:2.1 email;internet:billn at ywave.com title:Owner x-mozilla-cpt:;-10240 fn:Bill Nicholls end:vcard --------------DABA6E1D2EF6F7558C4991A4-- **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:08:07 +0100 (CET) From: "Adrian Gschwend" Subject: Re: RPM On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 07:52:56 -0800, billn wrote: >Now it is reasonable to take a longer term look, and I agree that LIBC >with fewest source mods is the right way to go because in the longer >term, that will make the best tool with the least maintenence. Ditto for >a new package builder and installer. > >Has anyone contacted Serenity-Systems to see what their plans are, and >how you could work cooperatively? I wrote that Bart and I did check that, and Bart is working on eCS :-) cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend at netlabs.org ktk [a t] netlabs.org ------- Free Software for OS/2 and eCS http://www.netlabs.org **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:31:01 -0800 (PST) From: "Steve Wendt" Subject: Re: Sorry for a dumb question On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 07:59:05 -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: >Me, I connect to my sons Linux box by telnetting into it and opening an >xterm, eg xterm -display -192.168.0.1:0 (my box). Have to set up >xhosts.0 to allow outside connections or use the xhost command. I'm not sure if all the right pieces work on OS/2, but SSH handles everything for you on Linux. In other words: lochost# ssh remotehost remhost# xterm& and xterm (or whatever X app) starts on your local machine, assuming X is running... ----------- "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." - Plato (427-347 B.C.) **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:28:51 -0800 From: billn Subject: Re: RPM This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------B3DBB68844F17FC9D878090D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Great! About all I can do to assist is to post updates on the OS/2 section of my website. That, and maybe test some of the software. I am *not* a C++ person. I probably missed your earlier note about eCS because I have just joined. BillN Adrian Gschwend wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 07:52:56 -0800, billn wrote: > >Has anyone contacted Serenity-Systems to see what their plans are, and > >how you could work cooperatively? > > I wrote that Bart and I did check that, and Bart is working on eCS :-) > > cu > > Adrian > > -- > Adrian Gschwend > at netlabs.org > > ktk [a t] netlabs.org > ------- > Free Software for OS/2 and eCS > http://www.netlabs.org --------------B3DBB68844F17FC9D878090D Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="billn.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for billn Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="billn.vcf" begin:vcard n:Nicholls;Bill x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.billswrite.com org:BW Services adr:;;;Yelm;WA;98597;USA version:2.1 email;internet:billn at ywave.com title:Owner x-mozilla-cpt:;-10240 fn:Bill Nicholls end:vcard --------------B3DBB68844F17FC9D878090D-- **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 18:46:16 +0100 (CET) From: Stefan Neis Subject: Re: Sorry for a dumb question On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Steve Wendt wrote: > I'm not sure if all the right pieces work on OS/2, but SSH handles everything for > you on Linux. In other words: > > lochost# ssh remotehost > remhost# xterm& Actually, it depends on the ssh version and installation. Some builds have X forwarding enabled by default, others require you to use a special flag, something like 'ssh -X remotehost', IIRC. And yes, it works just the same on OS/2. Regards, Stefan -- Micro$oft is not an answer. It is a question. The answer is 'no'. **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:07:31 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Sorry for a dumb question On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:31:01 -0800 (PST), Steve Wendt wrote: >On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 07:59:05 -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > >>Me, I connect to my sons Linux box by telnetting into it and opening an >>xterm, eg xterm -display -192.168.0.1:0 (my box). Have to set up >>xhosts.0 to allow outside connections or use the xhost command. > >I'm not sure if all the right pieces work on OS/2, but SSH handles everything for >you on Linux. In other words: > >lochost# ssh remotehost >remhost# xterm& > >and xterm (or whatever X app) starts on your local machine, assuming X is >running... Yes ssh is a better solution which IIRC does work on OS/2, I just haven't bothered to set it up yet. I don't mind using telnet as it is behind a firewall and doesn't have any personal info on it. I think you would still have to feed the display to xterm. Dave **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:40:43 -0500 From: Jack Troughton Subject: TCL Does anyone know if there's a solid port of TCL for unixos2 available? I need to port eggdrop and it requires it. I've got the most recent sources from sourceforge, but there don't appear to be any allowance for OS/2 in them. Does anyone know whereabouts I might be able to get a patch/diff/something or other? Thanks! Regards, Jack -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- * Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca * * http://consultron.ca irc.ecomstation.ca * * Kingston Ontario Canada news://news.consultron.ca * ------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 19:33:15 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: TCL On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 01:40:43PM -0500, Jack Troughton wrote: > Does anyone know if there's a solid port of TCL for unixos2 available? > > I need to port eggdrop and it requires it. > > I've got the most recent sources from sourceforge, but there don't > appear to be any allowance for OS/2 in them. Does anyone know > whereabouts I might be able to get a patch/diff/something or other? Have you checked:- ? http://www.vaeshiep.demon.nl/ > Thanks! > > Regards, > > Jack > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > * Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca * > * http://consultron.ca irc.ecomstation.ca * > * Kingston Ontario Canada news://news.consultron.ca * > ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- John **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:45:45 -0500 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: TCL Jack Troughton wrote: > > Does anyone know if there's a solid port of TCL for unixos2 available? > > I need to port eggdrop and it requires it. > > I've got the most recent sources from sourceforge, but there don't > appear to be any allowance for OS/2 in them. Does anyone know > whereabouts I might be able to get a patch/diff/something or other? There's a build of 8.3.5 with sources on Hobbes from last fall. h~ **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:31:42 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Fluxbox and unresolved symbols On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:34:32 -0500, Henry Sobotka wrote: >Dave and Natalie wrote: >> >> /// sets resource from string, specialized, must be implemented >> void setFromString(const char *strval); > >> /// specialized, must be implemented >> /// at return string value of resource >> std::string getString(); > >> Does anyone have any idea what needs to be changed so these functions >> are exported in libFbTk.a? > >They have to be implemented? I was on totally the wrong track. Using PGCC 2.95.3 (and disabling remember to get by a nonexistant function) gave me a better error message. Basically had to change 2 longs to unsigned long in the templates section of fluxbox.cc Dave **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:06:06 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Wendt Subject: Re: Sorry for a dumb question On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Dave and Natalie wrote: > Yes ssh is a better solution which IIRC does work on OS/2, I just haven't bothered to set it up yet. I don't mind > using telnet as it is behind a firewall and doesn't have any personal info on it. > I think you would still have to feed the display to xterm. Nope. **= Email 15 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 22:22:42 +0100 (CET) From: "Franz Bakan" Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 Beta 4 compiling gnuplot (CVS) On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:22:34 +0100, Knut Stange Osmundsen wrote: >> G N U P L O T >> Cannot spawn gnupmdrv.exe ! >> >> Source (pm.trm) is: >> ... >> spawnmode = P_SESSION | P_DEFAULT; > >P_SESSION is not implmeneted in LIBC yet, contributions are welcomed. Thanks for the info. Unfortunately I have no knowledge how to implement this :-( Regards Franz **= Email 16 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 21:25:07 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Posix/2 and Innotek gcc As I understand it, Innotek's gcc is being touted as the future standard version of gcc on OS/2. Can anyone say where that leaves Posix/2? Is it possible that the Posix/2 project is likely to get incorporated into the new gcc? -- John **= Email 17 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 16:58:21 -0500 From: Jack Troughton Subject: Re: TCL John Poltorak wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 01:40:43PM -0500, Jack Troughton wrote: > >>Does anyone know if there's a solid port of TCL for unixos2 available? >> >>I need to port eggdrop and it requires it. >> >>I've got the most recent sources from sourceforge, but there don't >>appear to be any allowance for OS/2 in them. Does anyone know >>whereabouts I might be able to get a patch/diff/something or other? > > Have you checked:- ? > > http://www.vaeshiep.demon.nl/ Actually, I went and got the sources from unixos2.com. I've since discovered that I need to have a working install of tcl before I can compile tcl:) I'm still working on putting the environment together to get all of that on the go... Regards, Jack -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- * Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca * * http://consultron.ca irc.ecomstation.ca * * Kingston Ontario Canada news://news.consultron.ca * ------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 18 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 23:46:43 +0100 (CET) From: Stefan Neis Subject: Re: Posix/2 and Innotek gcc On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, John Poltorak wrote: > As I understand it, Innotek's gcc is being touted as the future standard > version of gcc on OS/2. Can anyone say where that leaves Posix/2? > > Is it possible that the Posix/2 project is likely to get incorporated into > the new gcc? Actually Posix/2 is mainly adding *BSD functionality that's "missing" in EMX into that. Innotek's libc is based on FreeBSD's libc anyway, though Knut said he's only porting what's actually needed. When Innotek's libc has stabilised and I have some free time slot, I plan to visit Posix/2 and check what's included in Innotek's libc and what (if any) is not, possibly bundling the remaining parts into a new release, but I expect the vast majority of Posix/2 to be(come) part of the new libc... Regards, Stefan **= Email 19 ==========================** Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 23:46:43 +0100 (CET) From: Stefan Neis Subject: Re: Posix/2 and Innotek gcc On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, John Poltorak wrote: > As I understand it, Innotek's gcc is being touted as the future standard > version of gcc on OS/2. Can anyone say where that leaves Posix/2? > > Is it possible that the Posix/2 project is likely to get incorporated into > the new gcc? Actually Posix/2 is mainly adding *BSD functionality that's "missing" in EMX into that. Innotek's libc is based on FreeBSD's libc anyway, though Knut said he's only porting what's actually needed. When Innotek's libc has stabilised and I have some free time slot, I plan to visit Posix/2 and check what's included in Innotek's libc and what (if any) is not, possibly bundling the remaining parts into a new release, but I expect the vast majority of Posix/2 to be(come) part of the new libc... Regards, Stefan **= Email 20 ==========================** Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 12:24:11 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Building gcc 3.2.2 Does anyone have any hints or tips on building gcc 3.2.2? I've just pulled the source from Innotek and haven't come across any OS/2 specific README so far... -- John