Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 00:04:16 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 432 ************************************************** Friday 29 October 2004 Number 432 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Eureka! : John Poltorak 2 Re: GCC 3.3.4 / LIBC 0.6 Alpha 2 : John Poltorak 3 Re: Subversion : lamikr 4 Re: GCC 3.3.4 / LIBC 0.6 Alpha 2 : Dave Yeo" **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:08:19 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Eureka! On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 10:05:30AM +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > > Launching it with "mozilla > mozlog 2>&1" might provide a clue. > > After a rebuild with debug enabled I get the attached log... > > Among other things it suggests the file gfx_os2.dll is missing although I > have found several instances of it throughout the subdirectory so maybe it > has not been built correctly or hasn't been moved to the expected > location. I did copy it to my libpath, but that made no difference. > > Is there anything else I should look at? Someone suggested that I should check gfx_os2.dll with chkdll32 which found that pmwinx.dll was missing from the system on which I built mozilla, so I've installed that and now it comes up fine, so many thanks once again to all those that helped me get it built. -- John **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:39:53 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GCC 3.3.4 / LIBC 0.6 Alpha 2 On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:08:48PM +0200, Knut St. Osmundsen wrote: > Hi! > > I've just put out GCC 3.3.4 / LIBC 0.6 Alpha 2 for every one to play > with. It's currently available at: > ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/pub/gcc/GCC-3.3.4-alpha2.zip > it might later be available at: > http://download.innotek.de/gccos2/3.3.4-alpha2/gcc-3.3.4-alpha2.zip > > Unfortunately, this release is timebombed and will stop working 1st of > November. The reason being that some data which will be shared among all > future LIBC versions have not yet been finalized. I will try my best to > get a more final LIBC 0.6 out before the end of the month. Any news on an update or workaround for the timebomb? I'd like to try it to build Mozilla and wouldn't want a compile to stop half way through because it has hit the expiry date. > Have fun. > > Kind Regards, > knut -- John **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:32:10 +0300 From: lamikr Subject: Re: Subversion >>done much more than a few checkouts/updates/diff/log/info/status. Use of >>the local file system repository is only minimally tested. >> >> > >Doing a little reading around the place I've seen something about >Subversion using WebDAV as its network protocol. Does that mean I can use >Apache as the server for a version control system? I assume I would need to >install mod_dav... Is that available on OS/? > > Subversion will still itself use berkeley db 4 as it's backing store (or with subversion 1.1 there is also possible to use it's own iternal storage system) and apache/webdaw is just a method how SVN commands can be transfered over the HTTP to subversion. Not sure whether Eclipse can be run in the OS/2 but there is nice Subclipse Eclipse plugin which can access Subversion server over HTTP/WebDAW for getting and committing files. (subclipse.tigris.org) Subclipse itself is also written in Java but it requires also to get javahl library be build for a DLL. (Subclipse java client will use subversions native code via javahl-library). Javahl projects comes within the Subversion sources but at least for the subversion 1.0 it did not build automatically. (You needed to build it by calling make javahl) In addition to Webdav/HTTP it is also possible to send commands directly to subversion server from the clients using subversions own proprietary format. (Subversion includes command line client tools for this) Mika **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:01:45 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: Re: GCC 3.3.4 / LIBC 0.6 Alpha 2 On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:39:53 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: >Any news on an update or workaround for the timebomb? > >I'd like to try it to build Mozilla and wouldn't want a compile to stop >half way through because it has hit the expiry date. > You could always set your date back Dave