Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 00:00:55 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 696 ************************************************** Tuesday 09 May 2006 Number 696 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: automake 1.9.6 : John Poltorak 2 Re: nanosleep : Knut St. Osmundsen" 3 Re: ux2bs list : Brendan Oakley" 4 Re: automake 1.9.6 : Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= 5 Re: automake 1.9.6 : Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= 6 Re: automake 1.9.6 : John Poltorak 7 Re: ux2bs list : John Poltorak 8 Re: GNU make 3.81 : John Poltorak 9 Re: GNU make 3.81 : Franz Bakan" 10 Re: GNU make 3.81 : John Poltorak 11 GCC can't create directories? : Dave Yeo" 12 link line lentgh? : Dave Yeo" 13 Re: GCC can't create directories? : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de" 14 Re: GNU make 3.81 : Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= 15 Re: ux2bs list : Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= 16 Re: automake 1.9.6 : Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= 17 Re: GNU make 3.81 : John Poltorak 18 Re: automake 1.9.6 : Henry Sobotka **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 15:18:54 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: automake 1.9.6 On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 12:32:57PM +0200, Andreas Büning wrote: > Hello! > > I've uploaded automake 1.9.6 to > http://unixos2.com/pub/source/automake-1.9.6.zip. > I had to fix a bug with aclocal and drive letters. It seems to work now. I just tried building it from source and applying your patch and got this error Making install in doc make[1]: Entering directory `G:/ux2bs/workdir/automake-1.9.6/doc' restore=: && backupdir=".am$$" && \ am__cwd=`pwd` && cd . && \ rm -rf $backupdir && mkdir $backupdir && \ if (g:/bin/sh /ux2bs/workdir/automake-1.9.6/lib/missing --run makeinfo --version) >/dev/null 2>&1; then \ for f in automake.info automake.info-[0-9] automake.info-[0-9][0-9] automake.i[0-9] automake.i[0-9][0-9]; do \ if test -f $f; then mv $f $backupdir; restore=mv; else :; fi; \ done; \ else :; fi && \ cd "$am__cwd"; \ if g:/bin/sh /ux2bs/workdir/automake-1.9.6/lib/missing --run makeinfo -I .. \ -o automake.info automake.texi; \ then \ rc=0; \ cd .; \ else \ rc=$?; \ cd . && \ $restore $backupdir/* `echo "./automake.info" | sed 's|[^/]*$||'`; \ fi; \ rm -rf $backupdir; exit $rc automake.texi:9826: Unknown command `headitem'. makeinfo: Removing output file `automake.info' due to errors; use --force to preserve. make[1]: *** [automake.info] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `G:/ux2bs/workdir/automake-1.9.6/doc' make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 This included running, as a first step aclocal -I m4 automake autoconf Could any of these have introduced this error? I don't get the error when running the configure supplied with the original source, but that one appears to have been produced by autoconf v2.59c. > > Bye, > Andreas -- John **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 16:44:23 +0200 From: "Knut St. Osmundsen" Subject: Re: nanosleep Dave Yeo wrote: > On Sat, 06 May 2006 16:57:51 +0100, Dave Bamford wrote: > > >>Trying configure I get this error. Is there a library containing nanosleep? >> >> >>checking build system type... i386-pc-os2-emx >>checking host system type... i386-pc-os2-emx >>checking target system type... i386-pc-os2-emx >>checking for C++ compiler default output file name... conftest.exe >>checking whether the C++ compiler works... yes >>checking whether we are cross compiling... no >>checking for suffix of executables... .exe >>checking for suffix of object files... o >>checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes >>checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes >>checking whether the compiler supports exceptions... yes >>checking whether the compiler implements namespaces... yes >>checking for library containing nanosleep... no >>configure.: error: cannot find a short sleep function (nanosleep) > > > It is in Innotek_libc 6.1 but in include/time.h it says > * at todo Implement clock_getres(), clock_gettime(), clock_settime(), nanosleep(). That todo is wrong. Thanks for noticing. > Unluckily stock OS/2 has only 32 ms granuality By changing priority to time critical while waiting you can get <=8ms, libc does this for small sleeps. Without knowing the application, chances are that it's simply looking for something which is better than sleep(), so this won't really be an issue. Kind Regards, knut **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 12:11:50 -0700 From: "Brendan Oakley" Subject: Re: ux2bs list ------=_Part_47586_32382811.1147115510336 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 5/8/06, John Poltorak wrote: > > On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 09:06:49PM -0700, Brendan Oakley wrote: > > Thanks, it worked for me now. > > Did you send something to the list? I didn't get anything, and think I am > subscribed to it... > > -- > John > No - I just wanted to receive it for the moment. What is the address to sen= d to it? Brendan ------=_Part_47586_32382811.1147115510336 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline

On 5/8/06, John Poltorak <jp at warpix.org= > wrote:
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 09:06:49PM -0700, Brendan Oakley wrote:
> Tha= nks, it worked for me now.

Did you send something to the list? I did= n't get anything, and think I am
subscribed to it...

--
John

No - I just wanted to receive it for the moment. What is the address to sen= d to it?

Brendan
------=_Part_47586_32382811.1147115510336-- **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 21:31:46 +0200 From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= Subject: Re: automake 1.9.6 Dave Yeo schrieb: > > On Sun, 07 May 2006 08:51:24 -0800, Dave Yeo wrote: > > >On Sun, 07 May 2006 12:32:57 +0200, Andreas Büning wrote: > > > >>Hello! > >> > >>I've uploaded automake 1.9.6 to > >>http://unixos2.com/pub/source/automake-1.9.6.zip. > >>I had to fix a bug with aclocal and drive letters. It seems to work now > > > > Seems to of lost my message which was > I'm getting a 404 error trying to DL automake-1.9.6.zip (and the new make src) > Dave I'm sorry for that typos. It must be http://unixos2.com/pub/source/automake/automake-1.9.6.zip and http://unixos2.com/pub/binary/make/make-3.81-bin.zip http://unixos2.com/pub/binary/make/make-3.81-bin-static.zip http://unixos2.com/pub/source/make/make-3.81.zip Bye, Andreas -- Ein Betriebssystem, sie zu knechten, sie alle zu finden, Ins Dunkel zu treiben und ewig zu binden Im Lande Redmond, wo die Schatten drohn. (frei nach J. R. R. Tolkien) **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 21:49:00 +0200 From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= Subject: Re: automake 1.9.6 John Poltorak schrieb: > > On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 12:32:57PM +0200, Andreas Büning wrote: > I just tried building it from source and applying your patch and got this > error > > Making install in doc > make[1]: Entering directory `G:/ux2bs/workdir/automake-1.9.6/doc' [failure when running makeinfo] > This included running, as a first step > > aclocal -I m4 > automake > autoconf > > Could any of these have introduced this error? If you run the auto* tools, one or more of their output files (aclocal.m4, Makefile.in, configure, whatever) are newer than your doc/*.info files. So make will try to run makeinfo to recreate the *.info files from the *.texinfo files which obviously fails on your system. Either your makeinfo program is too old or it wasn't found. It happened also on my system. You can restore the original *.info* files (if they were overwritten) and 'touch' them to make them newer than all other files so they won't be recreated any more. It can be surprising when make tries to update the *.info* files and when not. > I don't get the error when running the configure supplied with the > original source, but that one appears to have been produced by autoconf > v2.59c. That effect is not related to the autoconf version. Bye, Andreas **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 22:09:38 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: automake 1.9.6 On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 09:49:00PM +0200, Andreas Büning wrote: > John Poltorak schrieb: > > > > On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 12:32:57PM +0200, Andreas Büning wrote: > > > I just tried building it from source and applying your patch and got this > > error > > > > Making install in doc > > make[1]: Entering directory `G:/ux2bs/workdir/automake-1.9.6/doc' > > [failure when running makeinfo] > > > > This included running, as a first step > > > > aclocal -I m4 > > automake > > autoconf > > > > Could any of these have introduced this error? > > If you run the auto* tools, one or more of their output files > (aclocal.m4, Makefile.in, configure, whatever) are newer than your > doc/*.info files. So make will try to run makeinfo to recreate > the *.info files from the *.texinfo files which obviously fails > on your system. Either your makeinfo program is too old or it > wasn't found. It happened also on my system. I have makeinfo v4.6 installed, so presumably this means automake.texi:9826: Unknown command `headitem'. makeinfo: Removing output file `automake.info' due to errors; use --force to preserve. 'headitem' is some sort of new directive... How do I check? As for INFO files, is there an way to create a PM version of info? > Bye, > Andreas -- John **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 22:34:08 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: ux2bs list On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 12:11:50PM -0700, Brendan Oakley wrote: > On 5/8/06, John Poltorak wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 09:06:49PM -0700, Brendan Oakley wrote: > > > Thanks, it worked for me now. > > > > Did you send something to the list? I didn't get anything, and think I am > > subscribed to it... > > > > -- > > John > > > > No - I just wanted to receive it for the moment. What is the address to send > to it? I can't remember - it's been pretty dormant for a long time on account of me being unable to build quite a few apps, so there has been nothing new, but with all these updates to the basic tool chain that Andreas has just brought out, I'd better update UX2BS fairly soon. > Brendan -- John **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 23:07:18 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GNU make 3.81 On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 12:33:20PM +0200, Andreas Büning wrote: > Hello! > > GNU make 3.81 has been relased! It's the first "official" release of GNU > make since OS/2 support was added. Is there any reason why I can't build this version using Make v3.76.1? The docs say I need v3.79.1. > Bye, > Andreas -- John **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 00:17:36 +0200 (CEST) From: "Franz Bakan" Subject: Re: GNU make 3.81 On Mon, 8 May 2006 23:07:18 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > Is there any reason why I can't build this version using Make v3.76.1? > > The docs say I need v3.79.1. Is there any reason, why you don't just use 3.79.1 or later instead of asking? Franz **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 00:44:14 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GNU make 3.81 On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:17:36AM +0200, Franz Bakan wrote: > On Mon, 8 May 2006 23:07:18 +0100, John Poltorak wrote: > > > Is there any reason why I can't build this version using Make v3.76.1? > > > > The docs say I need v3.79.1. > > Is there any reason, why you don't just use 3.79.1 or later instead of asking? Yes, it's to do with UX2BS which I've set up as an experimental build system for building Unix apps on OS/2. I start off with a very old set of ports which I call a baseline toolset and bring them up to date by building newer versions from source. Currently I have Make v3.76.1 as part of that baseline, so I want to know if building v3.79.1 is a required intermediary step for getting to v3.81. Everything needs to be built automatically without user intervention so I want to be clear about any requirements. > Franz -- John **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 22:57:13 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: GCC can't create directories? Building supretux I had this problem I:\usr\src\supertux > gcc -E -x c -CC -I. -I./src -DSCRIPTING_API src\scripting\wrapper.interface.hpp -o ../build/i386-pc-os2-emx/optimize/miniswig.tmp cc1.exe: No such file or directory: opening output file ../build/i386-pc-os2-emx/optimize/miniswig.tmp creating the build/i386-pc-os2-emx/optimize path first removed the error. Is this expected? Dave **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 22:52:57 -0800 From: "Dave Yeo" Subject: link line lentgh? Trying to build a large project with jam at the end I'm getting this error LinkApplication actions too long (max 996)! which is defined in jam.h for NT and OS/2 like this # define MAXLINE 996 /* longest 'together' actions */ Is this a true limit? Dave **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 11:19:18 +0200 From: "Stefan.Neis at t-online.de" Subject: Re: GCC can't create directories? Hi, > cc1.exe: No such file or directory: opening output file > ./build/i386-pc-os2-emx/optimize/miniswig.tmp > > creating the build/i386-pc-os2-emx/optimize path first removed the > error. Is this expected? Yes, the behaviour is the same on other platforms... Regards, Stefan **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 12:23:56 +0200 From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= Subject: Re: GNU make 3.81 John Poltorak schrieb: > Is there any reason why I can't build this version using Make v3.76.1? There are only very few packages which you can't build with 3.76 but, obviously, I can't test every combination of every tool for every package. I try to note one version of every tool that works with that specific package so that other people can reproduce my results. To answer your question: I really don't know. Maybe it works, maybe not. Bye, Andreas **= Email 15 ==========================** Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 12:34:18 +0200 From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= Subject: Re: ux2bs list John Poltorak schrieb: > new, but with all these updates to the basic tool chain that Andreas has > just brought out, I'd better update UX2BS fairly soon. Just a note: The tools which I updated recently don't have any important new features, AFAIK. Unless you have a package which really _requires_ the new version, there's no need to update ux2bs. I'd suggest to wait for autoconf 2.60 which is supposed to be released in the near future and which might require a larger update. IIRC they'll drop support for some very old Unix platforms and they'll change some installation paths (e.g., PREFIX/share/man instead of PREFIX/man). Bye, Andreas **= Email 16 ==========================** Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 12:38:04 +0200 From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=FCning?= Subject: Re: automake 1.9.6 John Poltorak schrieb: > I have makeinfo v4.6 installed, so presumably this means > > automake.texi:9826: Unknown command `headitem'. > makeinfo: Removing output file `automake.info' due to errors; use --force > to preserve. > > 'headitem' is some sort of new directive... How do I check? It's possible but I don't know. They used 4.7 to create the *.info files. > As for INFO files, is there an way to create a PM version of info? I don't think so. Bye, Andreas **= Email 17 ==========================** Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 13:31:52 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GNU make 3.81 On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:23:56PM +0200, Andreas Büning wrote: > John Poltorak schrieb: > > > Is there any reason why I can't build this version using Make v3.76.1? > > To answer your question: I really don't know. Maybe it works, maybe not. How do I establish whether it works? Simply by building it? Or are there some tests which need to be run to see if it works correctly? > > Bye, > Andreas -- John **= Email 18 ==========================** Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 09:20:36 -0400 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: automake 1.9.6 > John Poltorak schrieb: > > As for INFO files, is there an way to create a PM version of info? If you mean a PM viewer for info files, there's Emacs. h~