Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 00:05:23 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 628 ************************************************** Tuesday 11 October 2005 Number 628 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: XFree86 list : Holger Veit 2 Re: How to CHMOD only read-only files? : Steven Levine" 3 Re: How to CHMOD only read-only files? : John Poltorak 4 Re: Posix2 environment : dave bamford 5 Re: Posix2 environment : Dave Yeo" 6 Re: Posix2 environment : Dave Yeo" 7 Re: How to CHMOD only read-only files? : Dave Yeo" 8 Re: Help with scummvm configure script : Paul Smedley" 9 Re: Help with scummvm configure script : Paul Smedley" 10 Re: Help with scummvm configure script : Paul Smedley" 11 Re: Python 2.4.2 : Paul Smedley" 12 Re: Posix2 environment : dave bamford 13 Re: Posix2 environment : dave bamford 14 bug tracking software : John Poltorak 15 OpenSSL v0.9.8 : John Poltorak 16 Re: OpenSSL v0.9.8 : Paul Smedley 17 Re: bug tracking software : Jeff Robinson 18 Re: OpenSSL v0.9.8 : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:23:19 +0200 From: Holger Veit Subject: Re: XFree86 list Dave Yeo wrote: >On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 10:28:04 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > > > >>Is the XFree86 list still going? I've just had three emails returned... >> >> >> > >Hi John, I just sent a test message to the XFree86 list and it showed up there. Are you using the right address xfreeos2 at mail-ext1.ais.fraunhofer.de >Dave > > > The right address(TM) should be still xfreeos2 at ais.fraunhofer.de; it is just that for some obscure reasons our exterior mail gateway sometimes wants to be itself involved :-) And yes, this list is still valid. Regards Holger (and I am still alive and listening) **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 08:22:32 -0700 From: "Steven Levine" Subject: Re: How to CHMOD only read-only files? In <20051010143715.N88 at warpix.org>, on 10/10/05 at 02:37 PM, John Poltorak said: >If I can get FIND to search for the files which only have RO set then it >should be muh quicker. Let us know. You are using two apps, where one should do the job more efficiently, if implemented appropriately. This is what Dave and others are trying to tell you. I recommend you listen and test both ways. >The '-perm' option to FIND looks as though it >might do the trick but I haven't yet figured out the mode for RO. >This is from the man page for FIND The man page is correct for unix. You need to remember that OS/2 is not unix and that the permissions like many other things from unix can not map exactly. I recommend you experiment with find . ! -perm +002 find . ! -perm +020 find . ! -perm +200 find . ! +perm +222 and so on where the current directory contains some files you can use for testing. One of these might be able to find read only files in the sense that OS/2 uses the term and in these sense that you need for the problem at hand. Another option is to look at the chmod port and see how it is patched for OS/2 Regards, Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Steven Levine" MR2/ICE 2.67 #10183 Warp4.something/14.100c_W4 www.scoug.com irc.fyrelizard.com #scoug (Wed 7pm PST) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:31:53 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: How to CHMOD only read-only files? On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 08:22:32AM -0700, Steven Levine wrote: > In <20051010143715.N88 at warpix.org>, on 10/10/05 > at 02:37 PM, John Poltorak said: > > >If I can get FIND to search for the files which only have RO set then it > >should be muh quicker. > > Let us know. You are using two apps, where one should do the job more > efficiently, if implemented appropriately. This is what Dave and others > are trying to tell you. I recommend you listen and test both ways. There isn't a single app that I am aware of which will simply turn off the RO bit if it is set. > >The '-perm' option to FIND looks as though it > >might do the trick but I haven't yet figured out the mode for RO. > > >This is from the man page for FIND > > The man page is correct for unix. You need to remember that OS/2 is not > unix and that the permissions like many other things from unix can not map > exactly. I recommend you experiment with > > find . ! -perm +002 > find . ! -perm +020 > find . ! -perm +200 > find . ! +perm +222 > > and so on where the current directory contains some files you can use for > testing. One of these might be able to find read only files in the sense > that OS/2 uses the term and in these sense that you need for the problem > at hand. This works find . ! -perm +a+w | xargs chmod a+w the only trouble is that the chmod help screen is displayed when no match is found, but it is pretty quick when there is only a single match. Testing OpenSSL with one file set to RO, the whole directory tree is done in a couple of seconds but takes 12 secs to set the whole thing. I guess it really depends on how many RO files exist in any archive but suspect there aren't usually many. I would have thought that setting attributes is something which could be done when extracting files from a tar archive but haven't found a way of doing that. > Regards, > > Steven > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > "Steven Levine" MR2/ICE 2.67 #10183 Warp4.something/14.100c_W4 > www.scoug.com irc.fyrelizard.com #scoug (Wed 7pm PST) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- John **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:33:25 +0100 From: dave bamford Subject: Re: Posix2 environment Dave Yeo wrote: >On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 23:12:48 +0100, dave bamford wrote: > > > >>I am trying to port a backup utility from www.fluffy.co.uk/boxbackup >>We are using it successfuly on some windows machines (clients) >>with a Linux server, and I want to build a OS/2 client. >> >> > >Looks like an interesting program. > > > >>I have got quite a long way through, compiled openssl and compiled a >>poll routine which it seems happy with, but got as far as requiring zlib >>when I found it was already in /usr/include/posix2 as was poll.h, >> >>I am using gcc 3.2.2 shell, but can anyone tell me how it should be >>configured >>to use posix. >> >> >> > >I doubt that the posix2 libraries would work well with 3.2.2+ as libc was rewritten and >posix2 was developed to fix problems in the earlier libc (EMX). >I'm sure there would be a lot of conflicting defines etc. Might be best just to use the >needed functions such as poll. >>From the posix2 readme >* HOW TO USE IT? > >To use this package, add the directories created by unpacking _at_the_ >_beginning_ of your C_INCLUDE_PATH variable and right after the C++-only >directories in your CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH variable, e.g. > SET C_INCLUDE_PATH=F:/POSIX2/include;F:/EMX/INCLUDE > SET >CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH=F:/EMX/INCLUDE/CPP;F:/POSIX2/include;F:/EMX/INCLUD >E >Add the directory for the library to your LIBRARY_PATH, e.g. > SET LIBRARY_PATH=F:/POSIX2/LIB;F:/EMX/LIB >and add "-lcExt -lstcExt" to the linker options. > > >Zlib is quite easy to compile, just be aware that most OS/2 Z.DLLs use ordinals. Also >GCC 3.3.5 has a lot more support for various things and would likely be a better choice. >Dave > > Ok I thought I would try to compile with gcc 3.5.5 but I ran into problems straight away. I cant understand the error message, perhaps its a glitch with the compiler. Here is the offending code virtual void Get(int64_t & iItem) { int64_t privItem; if(!mStream.ReadFullBuffer(&privItem, sizeof(privItem), 0 /* not interested in bytes read if this fails */)) { THROW_EXCEPTION(CommonException, StreamableMemBlockIncompleteRead) } iItem = ntoh64(privItem); } And here is the error I get with gcc 3.5.5 In file included from ../../lib/common/ExcludeList.h:25, from BackupClientContext.h:15, from BackupClientContext.cpp:22: .../../lib/common/Archive.h: In member function `virtual void IOStreamArchive::Get(int64_t&)': .../../lib/common/Archive.h:186: error: `betoh64' undeclared (first use this function) Where does it get the betoh64 from in the code its ntoh64??? Any ideas? Dave. **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 15:41:05 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: Re: Posix2 environment On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:33:25 +0100, dave bamford wrote: >Where does it get the betoh64 from in the code its ntoh64??? >Any ideas? line 188 of lib/common/Box.h #ifdef PLATFORM_LINUX // On Linux, use some internal kernal stuff to do this #include #define hton64 __cpu_to_be64 #define ntoh64 __be64_to_cpu #else #define hton64 htobe64 #define ntoh64 betoh64 #endif Dave **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 15:58:37 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: Re: Posix2 environment On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:33:25 +0100, dave bamford wrote: >Where does it get the betoh64 from in the code its ntoh64??? >Any ideas? Also looks like Innotek_libc only has the 16 bit and 32 bit byteswap versions implemented (include\386\endian.h, around line 127) . See http://nixdoc.net/man-pages/OpenBSD/man3/betoh64.3.html for a description of the function. Dave **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:23:39 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: Re: How to CHMOD only read-only files? On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:31:53 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: >This works > >find . ! -perm +a+w | xargs chmod a+w > >the only trouble is that the chmod help screen is displayed when no match >is found, but it is pretty quick when there is only a single match. > >Testing OpenSSL with one file set to RO, the whole directory tree is done >in a couple of seconds but takes 12 secs to set the whole thing. I guess >it really depends on how many RO files exist in any archive but suspect >there aren't usually many. Hmm it is fast, about 25% the speed of chmod with no files set to readonly. Never got any chmod help screen either though it did try to process timex output. Actually without timex I do get the help screen. Could always set one file readonly first I guess. [G:\unixos2]timex chmod -R +aw * chmod: TIMEX.EXE: Permission denied Elapsed time: 25.72 seconds [G:\unixos2]timex find . ! -perm +a+w | xargs chmod a+w chmod: Elapsed: No such file or directory chmod: time:: No such file or directory chmod: 6.72: No such file or directory chmod: seconds: No such file or directory Dave **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:42:23 +0930 From: "Paul Smedley" Subject: Re: Help with scummvm configure script Hi Dave, On 8/10/2005, "Dave Yeo" wrote: >On Sat, 08 Oct 2005 20:00:25 +0930, Paul Smedley wrote: > >>Hi All, >>hopefully there's someone here with some decent knowledge of configure >>scripts :) >Well you could have \\ instead of \ or better use / as a pth seperator. I have this in my config.site >PATH=`cmd.exe /c "echo %PATH%" | sed -e 's at \\\\ at / at g'` >PATH_SEPARATOR=';' I also have this in config.site - however the configure script for scummvm doesn't load config.site. I'll have a play tonight using this approach on OS/2. Thanks for the ideas! Cheers, Paul. **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:46:10 +0930 From: "Paul Smedley" Subject: Re: Help with scummvm configure script Hi John, On 9/10/2005, "John Poltorak" wrote: >On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 08:00:25PM +0930, Paul Smedley wrote: >> This fails - partly because the path separator was defaulting to : not ; >> (now fixed) but also because the \ are interpreted as escape characters. >> Any ideas on some simple code to fix this? > >Have you tried running Autoconf first to create an OS/2 compatible version >of configure? Not an option - as scummvm doesn't use autoconf so doesn't include a configure.in Cheers, Paul. **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:44:57 +0930 From: "Paul Smedley" Subject: Re: Help with scummvm configure script Hi Andreas, On 8/10/2005, "Andreas Buening" wrote: >Paul Smedley wrote: > >> Scummvm (www.scummvm.org) has the following in it's configure script for >> detection of the sdl graphics library: >Could you give us some more details, please? What is configure checking >for, what are the values of these variables, what doesn't work and >what would you expect to happen Configure is checking for the presence of the file sdl-config in the system path. I think the problem is the \ getting interpreted as a escape code. I'll try using the string Dave suggested instead of $path in configure and see if that helps. Cheers, Paul. **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:50:51 +0930 From: "Paul Smedley" Subject: Re: Python 2.4.2 Hi Andrew, On 9/10/2005, "Andrew MacIntyre" wrote: >I've released a binary distribution, available from the usual places. > >Sorry, Paul - this release doesn't include any of the changes you worked >up for the Innotek toolchain. That's OK - I still have patches here. I still need to work out why the thread code fails with Innotek LIBC with recursive mutex errors. I might look at using pthreads instead... Cheers, Paul. **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 08:55:24 +0100 From: dave bamford Subject: Re: Posix2 environment Dave Yeo wrote: >On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:33:25 +0100, dave bamford wrote > > >>Where does it get the betoh64 from in the code its ntoh64??? >>Any ideas? >> >> > >Also looks like Innotek_libc only has the 16 bit and 32 bit byteswap versions >implemented (include\386\endian.h, around line 127) . >See http://nixdoc.net/man-pages/OpenBSD/man3/betoh64.3.html for a description of >the function. >Dave > > > I see big-endian and network order are equivalent. Am I right in assuming that the Innotek library is used by the gcc 3.3.5 package. I got past this point before when using gcc 3.2.2 from the unixos2 setup. Could I get this to compile using the old emx stuff? Emx seems more complete than the Libc from Innotek? Sorry about all the questions but I am relatively new to doing this sort of stuff, porting is a different ball game to doing straight programming. Dave. **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:28:58 +0100 From: dave bamford Subject: Re: Posix2 environment Dave Yeo wrote: >On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:33:25 +0100, dave bamford wrote: > > > >>Where does it get the betoh64 from in the code its ntoh64??? >>Any ideas? >> >> > >Also looks like Innotek_libc only has the 16 bit and 32 bit byteswap versions >implemented (include\386\endian.h, around line 127) . >See http://nixdoc.net/man-pages/OpenBSD/man3/betoh64.3.html for a description of >the function. >Dave > > On further investigation I found that the routine was called be64toh in endian.h not betoh64 so I changed the define and got to the next problem, c'est la vie. Dave. **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:41:27 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: bug tracking software Does anyone have any recommendations for bug tracking software for OS/2? -- John **= Email 15 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:04:54 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: OpenSSL v0.9.8 Has anyone tried building OpenSSL v0.9.8? Any success? -- John **= Email 16 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 19:57:05 +0930 From: Paul Smedley Subject: Re: OpenSSL v0.9.8 Hi John, John Poltorak wrote: > > Has anyone tried building OpenSSL v0.9.8? Any success? > I have it built with Innotek GCC 3.3.5r1 - so does Yuri. Haven't tried with EMX. Cheers, Paul. **= Email 17 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 06:43:46 -0500 From: Jeff Robinson Subject: Re: bug tracking software John Poltorak wrote: > Does anyone have any recommendations for bug tracking software for OS/2? > > I've used Mantis ( http://www.mantisbt.org/ ) in Linux for a couple years and it has worked very well. It is written in PHP, and I believe that Ted was running it on one of his OS/2 servers. In fact, their "About" page mentions OS/2. Jeff -- ---------------- Whatza JamochaMUD? http://www.jamochamud.org Or other stuff: http://www.anecho.mb.ca/~jeffnik ----------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 18 ==========================** Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 12:40:55 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: OpenSSL v0.9.8 On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 07:57:05PM +0930, Paul Smedley wrote: > Hi John, > > John Poltorak wrote: > > > > Has anyone tried building OpenSSL v0.9.8? Any success? > > > I have it built with Innotek GCC 3.3.5r1 - so does Yuri. Did it build straight out of the box or did you need to tweak anything? > Haven't tried with EMX. I just did and got the following error gcc -Ioutinc -Itmp_dll -DL_ENDIAN -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -m486 -Zmtd -Wall -Zomf -DOPENSSL_NO_RC5 -DOPENSSL_NO_MDC2 -DOPENSSL_NO_KRB5 -D_DLL -Zdll -Zbsd-signals -s -Zdll -o out_dll/crypto.dll tmp_dll/cryptlib.obj tmp_dll/mem.obj tmp_dll/mem_clr.obj ..... tmp_dll/e_cswift.obj tmp_dll/e_gmp.obj tmp_dll/e_chil.obj tmp_dll/e_nuron.obj tmp_dll/e_sureware.obj tmp_dll/e_ubsec.obj -lsocket os2/CRYPTO.def crypto\bn\asm\bn-os2.obj(bn-os2.obj) : error L2025: bn_sub_part_words : symbol defined more than once LINK386 : error L2022: pqueue_print (alias pqueue_print) : export undefined There were 2 errors detected make: *** [out_dll/crypto.dll] Error 1 Does this look familiar? > Cheers, > > Paul. > -- John