Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 00:04:18 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 359 ************************************************** Saturday 24 April 2004 Number 359 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Recreating aclocal.m4 : Dave Yeo" 2 __getenv_findEnv : unresolved external : John Poltorak 3 cal : John Poltorak 4 Re: testsuite for GNU ed : John Poltorak 5 Re: FAQs & UnixOS2 site : Anton Monroe 6 Re: FAQs & UnixOS2 site : John Poltorak 7 Bug report: INSTALLPKG.CMD : Anton Monroe 8 Re: FAQs & UnixOS2 site : Anton Monroe 9 _lstat : John Poltorak 10 Re: _lstat : Dave Yeo" 11 Re: _lstat : John Poltorak 12 Autoconf 2.59 problem : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 08:05:59 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: Re: Recreating aclocal.m4 On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 10:29:08 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > > >I'm having no success recreating the aclocal.m4 in bison's root directory. > >Do I need to delete the old one first? > >What is the file supposed to consist of? Try a plain sh aclocal. Here it works with version 1.4-p4 but with version 1.6 I get this error aclocal: configure.ac: 106: macro `AM_GNU_GETTEXT_VERSION' not found in library Dave **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 17:28:56 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: __getenv_findEnv : unresolved external Anyone know what I can do about:- ? __getenv_findEnv : unresolved external -- John **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 17:54:44 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: cal I've just managed to build GNU cal - a calendar program straight from source. I did need to change a Makefile.in file though... For some reason OBJEXT was getting resolved as 'o' instead of '.o' so OBJECTS were being set to gcalo instead of gcal.o. Incidentally, cal is one of the uitilities required by the Open Group standard for utilities. -- John **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 18:03:41 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: testsuite for GNU ed On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 06:59:54PM -0800, Dave Yeo wrote: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:54:19 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > > > > > > >I've just tried running 'make check' for this OS/2 port of GNU ed:- > > > >ftp://ftp.leo.org/pub/comp/os/os2/leo/gnu/systools/gnued.zip > > > >and get 'exited abnormally' for all the tests. > > > >Is this because the tests need porting to OS/2? > > > >I can't say I'm familiar with ED, but I've seen it used in some build > >scripts, so I thought I may as well build it... > > > > You need to change cmp to diff. Its failing due to the line endings, crtl-L vs ctrl-L ctrl-M You do realise I mean ED rather than SED... I know the change you mention makes a differenc on OS/2. I did try the same thing with ED, but still couldn't get any tests to pass. Maybe its the tests that are wrong.... Can anyone provide a simple ED script which if known to work, preferably on OS/2. I really don't know how to get ED to doing anything at all. > Dave -- John **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:57:11 -0500 From: Anton Monroe Subject: Re: FAQs & UnixOS2 site On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 05:54:09PM -0500, Jeff Robinson wrote: > I'd be quite happy to maintain something like this... just this morning > I updated the UnixOS2 pages somewhat and would like to expand it to have > more information about UX2BS as well. I think it makes sense to keep > everything more or less together, even if they are "separate" projects. I'm glad to see the update, I was afraid UnixOS2 was comatose. Unzip says a couple of files are mangled: /pub/binary/ux2_base/ux2_base-11-nov03.zip /pub/unixos2/unixos2-current/unixos2/ap1/ghostscr.zip I'm new, so I can offer more questions than answers, but here are some for a UnixOS2 FAQ. I know some of the information is covered in various places, but it ought to be in the FAQ also. Q: In what order do I need to install the packages? A: (I think) 1) ux2_base 2) os2libs 3) ?? Q: Is everything else optional? Or is everything under unixos2/a1 required? Meaning, do I really need two versions of Bash? Do some packages depend on others? Does installpkg.cmd detect dependencies? Q: Should I start with the latest ux2_base package from pub/binary/ux2_base/, or should I use the original ux2_base and then run upgradepkg.cmd to install the new one? Q: Many of the files under /pub/binary are plain zip files rather than UnixOS2 packages. How do I install them? Where do the makepkg and patchux2 packages come into it? Some of those packages require Perl, but Perl doesn't seem to be part of UnixOS2. (!?} Q: Who do I send bug reports and suggestions to? Anton **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 19:06:16 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: FAQs & UnixOS2 site On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 11:57:11AM -0500, Anton Monroe wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 05:54:09PM -0500, Jeff Robinson wrote: > > I'd be quite happy to maintain something like this... just this morning > > I updated the UnixOS2 pages somewhat and would like to expand it to have > > more information about UX2BS as well. I think it makes sense to keep > > everything more or less together, even if they are "separate" projects. > > I'm glad to see the update, I was afraid UnixOS2 was comatose. Not really. The initial phase was to create a number of PKGs based on the Linux Slackware distro which would eventually form a UnixOS/2 distro. For various reasons assembly of PKGs has been put on the back burner. At the moment I am looking at using UX2BS as a means of developing a UnixOS/2 distro. Once a way of creating PKGs directly from source has been devised then new PKGs will start coming off the assembly line, but that isn't imminent. > I'm new, so I can offer more questions than answers, but here are some > for a UnixOS2 FAQ. I know some of the information is covered in > various places, but it ought to be in the FAQ also. > > Q: In what order do I need to install the packages? They are just there as a convenience currently. I don't know if anyone actually uses them, or supports them. > Q: Many of the files under /pub/binary are plain zip files rather > than UnixOS2 packages. How do I install them? Where do the makepkg > and patchux2 packages come into it? Some of those packages require > Perl, but Perl doesn't seem to be part of UnixOS2. (!?} Feel free to add it :-)... > Q: Who do I send bug reports and suggestions to? Send them to this list and see if anyone bites. > Anton -- John **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 15:14:44 -0500 From: Anton Monroe Subject: Bug report: INSTALLPKG.CMD Somewhere around line 298 of installpkg.cmd, depending on the version, there is: if simul="no" then call UX2Mknod(unixroot"\"devname,type,major,minor) I think it should be: if simul="no" then call UX2Mknod unixroot"\"devname,type,major,minor Rexx apparently scans the script for syntax errors before it runs it, so it aborts even though UX2Mknod isn't actually used. I'm using Warp 3 fixpack 40 with Object Rexx, so it may be specific to my version of Rexx, but that line looks like bad syntax in any case. Anton **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 15:04:17 -0500 From: Anton Monroe Subject: Re: FAQs & UnixOS2 site On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 07:06:16PM +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > For various reasons assembly of PKGs has been put on the back burner. > At the moment I am looking at using UX2BS as a means of developing a > UnixOS/2 distro. Once a way of creating PKGs directly from source has been > devised then new PKGs will start coming off the assembly line, but that > isn't imminent. I've figured that out, but it isn't at all clear to someone looking at the UnixOS2 web site. It might be useful to explain it. Maybe on the "Status" page. Something along the lines of "At this point there are a number of packages under the unixos2-current/ directory. They are mostly utilities ported to OS/2-EMX, but packaged in a consistent way that tries to mimic a Unix-style file structure. In some cases they include a setup script that will do some useful configuration. Unixos2-current is not intended as a finished distribution. However, we encourage you to experiment with it, and you may find that it at least gives you a framework that you can add other EMX applications to. Right now, most of our effort is going into creating a build system called UX2BS. UX2BS will give developers an environment that will make it much easier to port applications to OS/2. You could think of it as an assembly line for creating UnixOS2 packages. To learn more about UX2BS see ." > They are just there as a convenience currently. I don't know if anyone > actually uses them, or supports them. I'll try using them, it's got to be saner than the jumble of EMX apps I have now. I'll post any bug reports with the understanding that fixing the "distribution" isn't a priority right now. Maybe someone can at least file them away for later. Anton **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 22:39:26 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: _lstat What can I do an undeined symbol _lstat? ISTR being able to get rid of it previously by using Autoconf, but can't get it to work now. -- John **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 19:11:03 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: Re: _lstat On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 22:39:26 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: >What can I do an undeined symbol _lstat? #ifdef __EMX__ #define lstat(n, b) stat(n, b) #endif /* EMX */ Dave **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 10:13:50 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: _lstat On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 07:11:03PM -0800, Dave Yeo wrote: > On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 22:39:26 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > > >What can I do an undeined symbol _lstat? > > #ifdef __EMX__ > #define lstat(n, b) stat(n, b) > #endif /* EMX */ Actually, after digging through my archives I found the solution suggested by Andreas the last time it happened - that was to run autoheader after autoconf. This solution worked perfectly well with MKTEMP v1.4 when I last tried it and also with the newer version (1.5) when I tried it yesterday. The thing is it only works using the OS/2 version of Autoconf v2.50, not the latest version. Maybe some experimental code was put in and then taken out. From my point of view it's much more preferable to leave source code alone if possible and am pleased that just running autoheader does the trick, automagically, in this case. > Dave -- John **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 11:13:07 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Autoconf 2.59 problem There seems to be a problem with the OS/2 version of Autoconf which is not present in the original distribution... This is the error I get when running configure on bc v1.06:- checking for lib.h... no checking for an ANSI C-conforming const... yes checking for size_t... yes checking for ptrdiff_t... yes checking for vprintf... yes checking for _doprnt... no checking for isgraph... yes checking for setvbuf... yes ../configure[5435]: syntax error: `if' unmatched It occurs after running aclocal automake --add-missing --force-missing autoconf autoheader configure using bc from:- ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/bc/bc-1.06.tar.gz This is a snippet from the configure script bcrl=n # Check whether --with-readline or --without-readline was given. if test "${with_readline+set}" = set; then <====================[5435] withval="$with_readline" echo "$as_me:$LINENO: checking for tparm" >&5 echo $ECHO_N "checking for tparm... $ECHO_C" >&6 if test "${ac_cv_func_tparm+set}" = set; then echo $ECHO_N "(cached) $ECHO_C" >&6 else cat >conftest.$ac_ext <<_ACEOF /* confdefs.h. */ _ACEOF I guess it must be difficult to spot what is causing this... I'll provide any more info if necessary. -- John