Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 02:37:52 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 92 ************************************************** Friday 28 February 2003 Number 92 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: New UX2BS : Maynard" 2 Re: New UX2BS - build_perl.cmd : Maynard" 3 Re: New UX2BS : John Poltorak 4 Re: New UX2BS - build_perl.cmd : John Poltorak 5 Re: New UX2BS : John Poltorak 6 Re: New UX2BS : Maynard" 7 Re: New UX2BS : Dave Saville" 8 Re: New UX2BS : Dave Saville" 9 Re: New UX2BS - gettext : Maynard" 10 Re: New UX2BS : Dave Saville" 11 Re: New UX2BS - wget : Dave Saville" 12 Re: New UX2BS : John Poltorak 13 Re: New UX2BS - wget : John Poltorak 14 Re: New UX2BS : Maynard" 15 Re: FILE utility builds : Maynard" 16 Re: New UX2BS - wget : Dave Saville" 17 Re: New UX2BS : John Poltorak 18 Re: New UX2BS : Dave Saville" 19 Re: New UX2BS : Dave Saville" 20 Re: Python : Maynard" 21 Re: byacc probs, was: New UX2BS : Hartmut Krafft" 22 Re: New UX2BS - alternate command processors : Maynard" 23 Re: New UX2BS : John Poltorak 24 Re: New UX2BS : Maynard" 25 Re: New UX2BS : Sohnen-Moe Associates, Inc" 26 Re: New UX2BS : Dave Saville" 27 Re: New UX2BS : John Poltorak 28 Re: New UX2BS : John Poltorak 29 Re: GETTEXT install failure : Maynard" 30 Re: GETTEXT install failure : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 07:58:59 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: New UX2BS John, >> the bootstrap/install completed successfully; though a dowload of tee >> (or otherwise assuring it on path) and use in logging would be a big >> asset. >As a bootstrap, it can't make any assumptions about what is already in >place. The presumption has to be that this is a pristine environment. The bootstrapping requires rsync, so it fetches it via ftp and then uses it. Don't try to persuade me that it can't do the same with tee. -- Maynard _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:01:04 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: New UX2BS - build_perl.cmd On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:06:25 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> echo ************pausing before running make test************— >> pause— >> >> WHY? >> >> makes for very poor unattended performance ;-} >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------- > >Oops! > >I had forgotten I had left that it. > > >It was there for debugging purposes, but for some reason the program >never paused. > >Did it pause on your system? Twice; once for each use of 'pause' -- Maynard _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:02:18 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 06:13:52PM -0600, Maynard wrote: > On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:37:12 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >Please let me know how you get on. > > ux2_bootstrap.cmd: > REM if exist rsync.exe goto fetch > rsync --version >nul && goto fetch > > the above works better to use existing rsync on path without retrieving > a duplicate by ftp. > > rsync then retrieves a duplicate \unixos2\lib\rsync.exe and a duplicate > \unixos2\lib\wget.exe > > these programs are known to exist on the system by the time rsync runs. > > ------------------------------------------- > ux2_inst.cmd: > > you still haven't corrected or defended your unnecessarily recursive > definition of > set bld_home=%bldrt%/%bld_home% IMV it works fine and there is no need to change it. > but perhaps it never ever will be useful to anybody to run ux2_inst.cmd > from the command line separate from being called by the bootstrapper. I > used to think it would be important for updates, but I'll reconsider > it. Running ux2_inst.cmd should be a one-off. > ---------------------------------- > the bootstrap/install completed successfully; though a dowload of tee > (or otherwise assuring it on path) and use in logging would be a big > asset. As a bootstrap, it can't make any assumptions about what is already in place. The presumption has to be that this is a pristine environment. > -- Maynard -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:06:25 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS - build_perl.cmd On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 06:42:22PM -0600, Maynard wrote: > > build_perl.cmd: > > > echo ************pausing before running make test************ù > pauseù > > WHY? > > makes for very poor unattended performance ;-} > > ------------------------------------------------------------- Oops! I had forgotten I had left that it. It was there for debugging purposes, but for some reason the program never paused. Did it pause on your system? > -- Maynard -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:09:13 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 09:12:00PM -0600, Maynard wrote: > On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:37:12 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >Please let me know how you get on. > > in spite of the following, it appears that byacc actually succeeded > > needed to change scripts\test\byacc to: > test yacc > from: yacc --version > > [X:\unixos2\lib]type build.err > byacc failed > > Directory of X:\unixos2\status > presence of nonzero length file indicates successful build > > 2-16-03 3:24p 0 . > 2-16-03 3:24p 0 .. > 2-28-03 7:57p 32 0 autoconf-2.13 > 2-28-03 7:57p 361 0 make-3.76.1 > 2-28-03 7:57p 322 0 autoconf-2.50 > 2-28-03 7:57p 289 0 automake-1.4-p5 > 2-28-03 7:59p 361 0 make > 2-28-03 8:00p 0 0 byacc > 2-28-03 8:01p 20 0 flex > 2-28-03 8:08p 32 0 ncurses > 2-28-03 8:09p 301 0 autoconf > 2-28-03 8:22p 34 0 gettext > 2-28-03 8:26p 260 0 texinfo > 2-28-03 8:26p 277 0 automake > 2-28-03 8:27p 32 0 regex > 2-28-03 8:27p 30 0 termcap > 2-28-03 8:28p 262 0 less Does this mean everything got built OK? If so, I'd like to make a switch to the new UX2BS fairly soon, although I could with at least one more person trying it out. -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:13:15 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: New UX2BS John, >Does this mean everything got built OK? That's how _I_ determine that everything built OK. How do you do it? -- Maynard > Directory of X:\unixos2\status > presence of nonzero length file indicates successful build and contains output of : -default: $pkg --version -or some other customized test existing in \unixos2\scripts\test files generated by modified build.sh > > 2-16-03 3:24p 0 . > 2-16-03 3:24p 0 .. > 2-28-03 7:57p 32 0 autoconf-2.13 > 2-28-03 7:57p 361 0 make-3.76.1 > 2-28-03 7:57p 322 0 autoconf-2.50 > 2-28-03 7:57p 289 0 automake-1.4-p5 > 2-28-03 7:59p 361 0 make > 2-28-03 8:00p 16 0 byacc > 2-28-03 8:01p 20 0 flex > 2-28-03 8:08p 32 0 ncurses > 2-28-03 8:09p 301 0 autoconf > 2-28-03 8:22p 34 0 gettext > 2-28-03 8:26p 260 0 texinfo > 2-28-03 8:26p 277 0 automake > 2-28-03 8:27p 32 0 regex > 2-28-03 8:27p 30 0 termcap > 2-28-03 8:28p 262 0 less _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:15:33 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS Perl builds with Failed 5/726 test scripts, 99.31% okay. 9/68702 subtests failed, 99.99% okay. Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- ../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t 1 256 17 1 5.88% 14 lib/os2_base.t 1 256 19 1 5.26% 8 lib/os2_process.t 3 768 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 lib/os2_process_kid.t 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 op/stat.t 73 1 1.37% 44 61 tests and 563 subtests skipped. Which looks like the normal set of failures. autoconf-2.13 - looks OK make-3.76.1 - looks OK autoconf-2.50 - Usual "Nothing to be done" & whinges about help2man automake-1.4-p5 - NTBD's otherwise OK make - Several make: *** [install-recursive] Error x byacc - OK flex - OK ncurses - OK autoconf.log - OK apart from help2man whinge gettext - OK texinfo - OK automake - OK regex - OK termcap - OK less - OK OK means I can't see any obvious errors. Wether the binaries are all with .exe and in the right place is another matter :-) Also, as usual, I totally forgot about switching shells first. But looking at the environment dump at the end of the logs it seems to have worked. Did you change something? -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:20:52 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS Here is a list of all the "no such file" messages from the latest build system. [E:\unixos2\logs]grep -i "no such file" * gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: gettext.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: ngettext.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgcmp.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgfmt.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgmerge.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgunfmt.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: xgettext.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgattrib.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgcat.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgcomm.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgconv.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgen.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgexec.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msgfilter.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msggrep.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msginit.exe: No such file or directory gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: msguniq.exe: No such file or directory less.log:scrsize.c:44: X11/Xlib.h: No such file or directory less.log:scrsize.c:45: X11/Xutil.h: No such file or directory ncurses.log:cp: ../share/terminfo: No such file or directory perl.log:cat: extras.lst: No such file or directory perl.log:t/io/pipe............................Error reading "/no_such_process": No such file or directory at io/pipe.t line 186. perl.log:cat: extras.lst: No such file or directory perl.log:cat: extras.lst: No such file or directory perl.log:io/pipe................................Error reading "/no_such_process" : No such file or directory at io/pipe.t line 186. -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:25:30 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: New UX2BS - gettext Good Spot, Dave!! >Here is a list of all the "no such file" messages from the latest >build system. > >[E:\unixos2\logs]grep -i "no such file" * >gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: gettext.exe: No such file or You may have discovered this by now, but for gettext, all those .exe files are in workdir\gettext-0.11.5\src\.libs It appears that the install didn't look in the right place for them They are created by the build, and they seem to work: [X:\UNIXOS2\workdir\gettext-0.11.5\src\.libs]gettext --version gettext (GNU gettext) 0.11.5 _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:25:56 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS Just having a poke about in gettext lib. All the .lo & .o files have timestamps of last nights build but: [E:\unixos2\workdir\gettext-0.11.5\lib]file progname.o progname.o: Linux/i386 impure executable (OMAGIC) ?? -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:30:41 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS - wget Just tried building wget - does not get anywhere. Used to get farther than this. DIR URL CFLAGS LDFLAGS CFGPARMS MAKEPARM SRC ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/wget/wget-1.8.2.tar.gz . URL ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/wget/wget-1.8.2.tar.gz CFLAGS LDFLAGS CFGPARMS MAKEPARM SRC . wget-1.8.2.tar.gz already retrieved e:/unixos2/workdir e:/unixos2/workdir/wget-1.8.2 hello ./configure loading site script e:/unixos2/lib/config.site creating cache ./config.cache configuring for GNU Wget 1.8.2 checking host system type... i386-pc-os2-emx checking whether make sets ${MAKE}... yes checking for a BSD compatible install... e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe checking for gcc... gcc checking whether the C compiler (gcc ) works... yes checking whether the C compiler (gcc ) is a cross-compiler... yes checking whether we are using GNU C... yes checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E checking for AIX... no checking for Cygwin environment... no checking for mingw32 environment... no checking build system type... i386-pc-os2-emx checking for ld used by GCC... no configure: error: no acceptable ld found in $PATH make make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop. make: Nothing to be done for `install'. -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:38:23 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 08:15:33AM +0000, Dave Saville wrote: > Perl builds with > > Failed 5/726 test scripts, 99.31% okay. 9/68702 subtests failed, > 99.99% okay. > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List > of > Failed > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > --------- > ../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t 1 256 17 1 5.88% 14 > lib/os2_base.t 1 256 19 1 5.26% 8 > lib/os2_process.t 3 768 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 > lib/os2_process_kid.t 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 > op/stat.t 73 1 1.37% 44 > 61 tests and 563 subtests skipped. > > Which looks like the normal set of failures. That looks good, although if you have you previous logs anywhere, could you checked the number of subtests run, and the number of tests and subtests skipped? > autoconf-2.13 - looks OK > make-3.76.1 - looks OK > autoconf-2.50 - Usual "Nothing to be done" & whinges about help2man Drat! I included that one on my test system, but forgot to add it into the online version. It does build OK so it may as well get included in update_base.cmd. > automake-1.4-p5 - NTBD's otherwise OK > make - Several make: *** [install-recursive] Error x I get this even though make does seem to get built. I'd like to know what is wrong here. > byacc - OK > flex - OK > ncurses - OK > autoconf.log - OK apart from help2man whinge > gettext - OK > texinfo - OK > automake - OK > regex - OK > termcap - OK > less - OK > > OK means I can't see any obvious errors. Wether the binaries are all > with .exe and in the right place is another matter :-) It seems to have run very well. The only major problem I'm aware of, and maybe you can confirm this, is that the GETTEXT executables do not get installed. It seems they get built in the wrong directory. BTW did you encounter a 'pause' in Perl's build? There is one in build_perl.cmd, that I had forgotten about, but it doesn't seem to do anything here. > Also, as usual, I totally forgot about switching shells first. But > looking at the environment dump at the end of the logs it seems to > have worked. Did you change something? Not specifically, AFAIK. Is there a test I need to put in place for different shells? I've never used any cmd processor replacements and don't know what is usually involved. > -- > Regards > > Dave Saville -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:52:18 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS - wget On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 08:30:41AM +0000, Dave Saville wrote: > Just tried building wget - does not get anywhere. Used to get farther > than this. WGET has never worked very well so far. Different versions have been tried and some get further than others. ISTR that I was able to build an old version straight out of the box, but don't remember specifically which version. > DIR URL CFLAGS LDFLAGS CFGPARMS MAKEPARM SRC > ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/wget/wget-1.8.2.tar.gz . > URL ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/wget/wget-1.8.2.tar.gz > CFLAGS > LDFLAGS > CFGPARMS > MAKEPARM > SRC . > wget-1.8.2.tar.gz already retrieved > configure: error: no acceptable ld found in $PATH I just tried this myself and got the same error. What it needs is a file \unixos2\scripts\pre-process\wget which contains:- export LD=ld After that, it does get further, but still stops. BTW if you try an app and get any errors relating to wrong headers, try adding the appname to p2_exc.lst. This will remove the Posix/2 environment from its build. Sometimes Posix/2 does cause problems. > -- > Regards > > Dave Saville -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:54:44 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:38:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >Is there a test I need to put in place for different shells? need to test for os2_shell == \os2\cmd.exe in any batchfile which invokes a command processor. Perhaps for now it's best to test %comspec% in ux2_inst.cmd at echo off echo %os2_shell% >%temp%\ux2cmdtest find /i "\\os2\\cmd.exe" %temp%\ux2cmdtest && goto PROCEED echo critical test FAILED: os2_shell envar not equal ...\os2\cmd.exe echo building the ux2 environmnet requires standard OS/2 command shell \os2\cmd.exe exit :PROCEED I don't know for sure that no other shell will pass or fail the bootstrap or build process, so this restriction may be too stringent. For my regular usage: [n:\]echo %comspec% & echo %os2_shell% U:\4OS225\4OS2.EXE N:\OS2\CMD.EXE -- Maynard _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 15 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:01:04 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: FILE utility builds My suse7 system has: /usr/bin/file /usr/share/misc/magic -- Maynard On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 15:02:49 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >Thanks to some patches provided by Stefan as well as the addition of a >missing source file, the very useful FILE utility (v3.400 will now build >using UX2BS. > > >For those that have never come across it, FILE attempts to identify the >filetype of a given file using its own database of file signatures in a >file called MAGIC. > >A question remains as to where is the preferred location for this file... > >In previous OS/2 ports it has been located in %ETC%, but I'm not sure if >the preferred location should be /usr/share... > >If anyone has a Unix system available with this utility installed, could >you tell me where MAGIC is kept? > > >-- >John > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >UX2BS mailing list >UX2BS at os2ports.com >http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs > _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 16 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:01:27 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS - wget On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:52:18 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 08:30:41AM +0000, Dave Saville wrote: >> Just tried building wget - does not get anywhere. Used to get farther >> than this. > >WGET has never worked very well so far. Different versions have been tried >and some get further than others. > >ISTR that I was able to build an old version straight out of the box, but >don't remember specifically which version. My recollection is that we could build a wget but could not turn it into a .exe that worked. -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 17 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 09:02:14 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 08:20:52AM +0000, Dave Saville wrote: > Here is a list of all the "no such file" messages from the latest > build system. > > [E:\unixos2\logs]grep -i "no such file" * > gettext.log:e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: gettext.exe: No such file or > directory All the gettext executables fail to get installed. It seems as though install.exe is not looking in the directory where they get built. We could do with find out what's wrong. > less.log:scrsize.c:44: X11/Xlib.h: No such file or directory > less.log:scrsize.c:45: X11/Xutil.h: No such file or directory Less needs a couple of headers from Xfree to build a particular program, but we haven't started on X yet. > ncurses.log:cp: ../share/terminfo: No such file or directory This is just a spurious NCURSES error msg which has been reported and a fix may be available, but it doesn't have any material effect so I have pursued it. > perl.log:cat: extras.lst: No such file or directory > perl.log:t/io/pipe............................Error reading > "/no_such_process": > No such file or directory at io/pipe.t line 186. > perl.log:cat: extras.lst: No such file or directory > perl.log:cat: extras.lst: No such file or directory > perl.log:io/pipe................................Error reading > "/no_such_process" > : No such file or directory at io/pipe.t line 186. These are just normal Perl error msgs. > > -- > Regards > > Dave Saville -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 18 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:09:01 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:38:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 08:15:33AM +0000, Dave Saville wrote: >> Perl builds with >> >> Failed 5/726 test scripts, 99.31% okay. 9/68702 subtests failed, >> 99.99% okay. >> Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List >> of >> Failed >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> --------- >> ../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t 1 256 17 1 5.88% 14 >> lib/os2_base.t 1 256 19 1 5.26% 8 >> lib/os2_process.t 3 768 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 >> lib/os2_process_kid.t 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 >> op/stat.t 73 1 1.37% 44 >> 61 tests and 563 subtests skipped. >> >> Which looks like the normal set of failures. > >That looks good, although if you have you previous logs anywhere, could >you checked the number of subtests run, and the number of tests and >subtests skipped? > Failed 5/726 test scripts, 99.31% okay. 9/68658 subtests failed, 99.99% okay. Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- ../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t 1 256 17 1 5.88% 14 ../lib/Memoize/t/speed.t 6 1 16.67% 2 lib/os2_base.t 1 256 19 1 5.26% 8 lib/os2_process.t 3 768 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 lib/os2_process_kid.t 227 3 1.32% 90 174 209 62 tests and 563 subtests skipped. >It seems to have run very well. The only major problem I'm aware of, and >maybe you can confirm this, is that the GETTEXT executables do not get >installed. It seems they get built in the wrong directory. > [E:\]gfind . -name get*exe unixos2/workdir/gettext-0.11.5/src/.libs/gettext.exe Yup >BTW did you encounter a 'pause' in Perl's build? > >There is one in build_perl.cmd, that I had forgotten about, but it doesn't >seem to do anything here. > No, > >> Also, as usual, I totally forgot about switching shells first. But >> looking at the environment dump at the end of the logs it seems to >> have worked. Did you change something? Normally using YAOS the environment setting up does not work - Ho hum -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 19 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:15:57 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 09:02:14 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >All the gettext executables fail to get installed. > >It seems as though install.exe is not looking in the directory where they >get built. We could do with find out what's wrong. No install has been given the wrong info e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe gettext.exe e:/usr/bin/gettext.exe >From the less log install less.exe lesskey.exe /usr/bin I suspect that this e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe gettext.exe e:/usr/bin/gettext.exe should be e:/unixos2/bin/install.exe gettext.exe e:/usr/bin/ -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 20 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:24:34 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: Python John, >If anyone has Python installed on a Unix system, could you say where it is >installed? I'm wondering if there is a generally agreed location for it... One feature of vpc/2 is that I can backup my standard linux .vxd and install or otherwise potentially damage my environment, and restore quite painlessly. Python just installed into (per 'whereis'): /usr/bin/python is symlink to: /usr/bin/python2.1 /usr/lib/python is symlink to: /usr/lib/python2.1 /usr/share/man/man1/python.1.gz -- Maynard _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 21 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:43:07 +0100 (MEZ) From: "Hartmut Krafft" Subject: Re: byacc probs, was: New UX2BS On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 21:12:00 -0600 (CST), Maynard wrote: >>Please let me know how you get on. > >in spite of the following, it appears that byacc actually succeeded > >needed to change scripts\test\byacc to: >test yacc >from: yacc --version > >[X:\unixos2\lib]type build.err >byacc failed ...in update_base's dependent scripts, there are two errors concerning byacc: 1.) byacc.tar.gz is a symlink on ftp://invisible-island.net/ -so it won't be retrieved. to fix this, change the wget line in build.sh: add option '--retr-symlinks' 2.) installing the man pages fails /usr/share and /usr/share/man do not exist at that point. --create directories first in build_byacc.cmd I think that that has nothing to do with the above error message, but wanted to tell you anyway... Greetings Hartmut _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 22 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:53:37 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: New UX2BS - alternate command processors Dave, >That is why messing with env vars seemed to fail. But yaos gives >build.cmd to cmd and build called the env stuff effectively under a >cmd so it works. If you can follow that :-) I'm not sure! when I issue 'start /f' from an OS/2 shell, I get a \os2\cmd.exe shell: [F:\]ver /r & echo %comspec% & echo %os2_shell% The Operating System/2 Version is 4.50 Revision 14.086 U:\4OS225\4OS2.EXE N:\OS2\CMD.EXE interesting that %comspec% is not correct/current for the new/current shell; yet when I issue 'start /f' from this secondary shell, .... surprise!!... I get a 4os2 shell 4OS2/32 2.50 OS/2 Version is 2.45 Copyright 1988-1994 Rex Conn & JP Software Inc. All Rights Reserved 4OS2 S/N ----------, registered to Maynard Riley for use on a single computer. May not be distributed to others. [f:\]ver /r & echo %comspec% & echo %os2_shell% 4OS2/32 2.50 OS/2 Version is 2.45 4OS2/32 Revision C (28) OS/2 Revision A 4OS2 S/N --------, registered to Maynard Riley for use on a single computer. May not be distributed to others. U:\4OS225\4OS2.EXE N:\OS2\CMD.EXE I could consider this troublesome. The original shell/CLI was invoked by program object for the 4os2 command processor. Since %os2_shell% is set by config.sys to \os2\cmd.exe, that is what gets invoked as the secondary processor .... except, ---!surprise again!.... if I set os2_shell=u:\4os225\4os2.exe before 'start /f', the secondary is still cmd.exe There must be more to this than I'm understanding ;-} -- Maynard _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 23 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 10:12:17 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 09:09:01AM +0000, Dave Saville wrote: > On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:38:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 08:15:33AM +0000, Dave Saville wrote: > >> Perl builds with > >> > >> Failed 5/726 test scripts, 99.31% okay. 9/68702 subtests failed, > >> 61 tests and 563 subtests skipped. > >> > >> Which looks like the normal set of failures. > > > >That looks good, although if you have you previous logs anywhere, could > >you checked the number of subtests run, and the number of tests and > >subtests skipped? > > > > Failed 5/726 test scripts, 99.31% okay. 9/68658 subtests failed, > 62 tests and 563 subtests skipped. That's interesting. I wonder what would account for the additional subtests... > >It seems to have run very well. The only major problem I'm aware of, and > >maybe you can confirm this, is that the GETTEXT executables do not get > >installed. It seems they get built in the wrong directory. > > > > [E:\]gfind . -name get*exe > unixos2/workdir/gettext-0.11.5/src/.libs/gettext.exe > > Yup Apparently they are supposed to get built in the src directory. I wonder if that happens on Unix... > >BTW did you encounter a 'pause' in Perl's build? > > > >There is one in build_perl.cmd, that I had forgotten about, but it doesn't > >seem to do anything here. > > > > No, I wonder why a 'pause' is ignored like this... > -- > Regards > > Dave Saville -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 24 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 10:38:04 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: New UX2BS Hi John, >OK. Give it another try and see what you think. > >Just start ux2_bootstrap again and stop it after before the Perl build >starts. > >Remember this is the build-test area. I'm not finding anything new. Can't you just include \unixos2\bin\tee.exe in the rsync ? It's not big enough to annoy anybody. -- Maynard _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 25 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 11:20:48 -0700 (MST) From: "Sohnen-Moe Associates, Inc" Subject: Re: New UX2BS -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:02:18 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> set bld_home=%bldrt%/%bld_home% > >> but perhaps it never ever will be useful to anybody to run ux2_inst.cmd >> from the command line separate from being called by the bootstrapper. I >> used to think it would be important for updates, but I'll reconsider >> it. > >Running ux2_inst.cmd should be a one-off. > "Should be" is the key phrase. ____________________________________________________________________ Sohnen-Moe Associates, Inc. 3906 West Ina Road #200-367 Tucson, AZ 85741-2295 email: sma at sohnen-moe.com Voice: 520.743.3936 Website: http://www.sohnen-moe.com FAX: 520.743.3656 ____________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 OS/2 for non-commercial use Comment: PGP 5.0 for OS/2 Charset: cp850 wj8DBQE+YPoA5z5shEq8TYMRArBVAKDqmoOvapf4SMGcD+nkZKLcgCHBzQCgv6k1 ispEl4hXPOuvFhgxyoKQllM= =5vFi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 26 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 15:11:02 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 08:54:44 -0600 (CST), Maynard wrote: >On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 08:38:23 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >>Is there a test I need to put in place for different shells? > >need to test for os2_shell == \os2\cmd.exe in any batchfile which invokes a command processor. > >Perhaps for now it's best to test %comspec% in ux2_inst.cmd > > at echo off >echo %os2_shell% >%temp%\ux2cmdtest >find /i "\\os2\\cmd.exe" %temp%\ux2cmdtest && goto PROCEED >echo critical test FAILED: os2_shell envar not equal ...\os2\cmd.exe >echo building the ux2 environmnet requires standard OS/2 command shell \os2\cmd.exe >exit >:PROCEED > >I don't know for sure that no other shell will pass or fail the bootstrap or build process, so this restriction may be too stringent. I just worked out that actually I don't have a problem with yaos - I thought there was one when I was helping John with getting a clean env. I was trying commands from my command prompt - and they failed so I assumed that there was a problem. However, yaos fires of whatever you give it in a cmd shell - effectively it &'s it in the *nix sense. That is why messing with env vars seemed to fail. But yaos gives build.cmd to cmd and build called the env stuff effectively under a cmd so it works. If you can follow that :-) -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 27 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 16:12:15 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 07:58:59AM -0600, Maynard wrote: > John, > > >> the bootstrap/install completed successfully; though a dowload of tee > >> (or otherwise assuring it on path) and use in logging would be a big > >> asset. > > >As a bootstrap, it can't make any assumptions about what is already in > >place. The presumption has to be that this is a pristine environment. > > The bootstrapping requires rsync, so it fetches it via ftp and then > uses it. > > Don't try to persuade me that it can't do the same with tee. OK. Give it another try and see what you think. Just start ux2_bootstrap again and stop it after before the Perl build starts. Remember this is the build-test area. > -- Maynard -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 28 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 16:41:29 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: New UX2BS On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 10:38:04AM -0600, Maynard wrote: > Hi John, > > >OK. Give it another try and see what you think. > > > >Just start ux2_bootstrap again and stop it after before the Perl build > >starts. > > > >Remember this is the build-test area. > > I'm not finding anything new. You sure? Can you display what RSYNC tells you is under lib ? > -- Maynard -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 29 ==========================** Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 17:11:18 -0600 (CST) From: "Maynard" Subject: Re: GETTEXT install failure It looks to me like the problem is in libtool, which actually runs gcc and install; Make calls libtool Make: X:/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=link gcc -o gettext.exe gettext.o ../lib/basename.lo ../lib/error.lo ../lib/getopt.lo ../lib/getopt1.lo ../lib/strtoul.lo ../lib/xmalloc.lo ../intl/libintl.la Note that libtool inserts the .libs/ path during mode=link libtool: gcc -o .libs/gettext.exe gettext.o ../lib/basename.o ../lib/error.o ../lib/getopt.o ../lib/getopt1.o ../lib/strtoul.o ../lib/xmalloc.o ../intl/.libs/intl.a -LX:/usr/lib The above is logged three times by the way. Then during 'make install': Make: X:/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=install X:/unixos2/bin/install.exe gettext.exe X:/usr/bin/gettext.exe Note that libtool during mode=install does not insert the .libs/ path libtool: X:/unixos2/bin/install.exe gettext.exe X:/usr/bin/gettext.exe ----------------------- There isn't a 'make test' ; but a 'make check' which doesn't find much success. -- Maynard _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 30 ==========================** Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 18:11:41 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GETTEXT install failure On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 10:27:55PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote: > John Poltorak wrote: > > > > GETTEXT v0.11.5 appears to build OK without any problems, apart from minor > > things like this:- > > > > u:/unixos2/workdir/gettext-0.11.5 > > Using:- autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.57 (release for OS/2) > > configure.in:7: warning: do not use m4_patsubst: use patsubst or m4_bpatsubst > > configure.in:265: warning: do not use m4_regexp: use regexp or m4_bregexp > > configure.in:229: error: do not use LIBOBJS directly, use AC_LIBOBJ (see section `AC_LIBOBJ vs LIBOBJS' > > If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow. > > See the Autoconf documentation. > > The maintainer should update configure.in. Usually you can ignore this. > > [snip] > > > u:/bin/sh ../mkinstalldirs u:/usr/bin > > u:/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=install u:/unixos2/bin/install.exe gettext.exe u:/usr/bin/gettext.exe > > u:/unixos2/bin/install.exe gettext.exe u:/usr/bin/gettext.exe > > u:/unixos2/bin/install.exe: gettext.exe: No such file or directory > > [snip] > > > The binaries are built in src\.libs. Is this the location one would expect > > them to be built in? > > No. Should be in src. Which gettext source did you use and what > exactly did you do? As it says above, v0.11.5. The build went through the normal standard build process. Two other people today have verified that is built that way. That is one thing UX2BS is supposed to provide - a standard build environment where the same results can almost be guaranteed by running the same process on a different machine. I was hoping you would install it at some time so that you could see exactly what I was referring to... > > Bye, > Andreas > > -- > One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them, > One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them > In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs