Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 02:40:26 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 122 ************************************************** Monday 31 March 2003 Number 122 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Autoconf error...? : Hannes Hromadka 2 Re: M4 : John Poltorak 3 Re: Perl v5.8.1 : Dave Saville" 4 Re: Perl v5.8.1 : John Poltorak 5 Re: Building Apache : Henry Sobotka 6 Re: Building Apache : Mika Laitio **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 08:33:21 +0200 From: Hannes Hromadka Subject: Re: Autoconf error...? On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 07:48:45PM +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > > No way, I tried but got lost in the files. When I removed the 'done' which > > caused the error I got another error about 400 lines !!! earlier in the > > file. > > > > I could not even find the matching do statement 8-( > > I can't help feeling that the error is due to a bug in Autoconf... I've > found that the configure script itself will run OK and it's only when it's > rebuilt with Autoconf that the error occurs. Is this the case with SLRN? I never did configure for SLRN on OS/2, I always used the old makefile for OS/2. Before you can run configure for slrn you have to run the whole bunch of automake, autoheader and autoconf. And this does not produce useful files on OS/2 right now. But as this complex way works fine on all other platforms I assume a bug in the OS/2 build system. There are a lot of the basic build tools compiled with success. But what we need now is test suite for the auto*** stuff. Ciao, Hannes -- Johannes Hromadka | Email Office: HromadkaJ at gmx.at | Home : Johannes.Hromadka at gmx.net Vienna/Austria/Europe | OECC: http://www.oecc.org/ >>> Rust never sleeps (borrowed from Neil YOUNG) <<< _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 08:50:22 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: M4 On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 11:48:09PM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote: > Back to the problem: > > echo m4.exe | sed 's,x,x,' > prints out "m4.exe" here, so > u:/unixos2/bin/install.exe m4.exe /usr/local/bin/`echo m4.exe | sed > 's,x,x,'` > should execute > u:/unixos2/bin/install.exe m4.exe /usr/local/bin/m4.exe > > Where does that fail for you? Is cmd.exe called instead of sh.exe? > Are the paths right? Hmm... I'm not entirely sure what I've changed as it's working correctly now. Thanks for the explanation anyway. > Sebastian -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 09:43:31 +0100 (BST) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: Perl v5.8.1 On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:39:48 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >Thanks for that. > >How does that compare with 5.8.0 ? Dunno - it wiped the previous log, which never occurred to me as it was using a different workdir - and I don't backup that partition. Incidently the workdir is perl - not perl-5.8.1 -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:43:33 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Perl v5.8.1 On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 09:43:31AM +0100, Dave Saville wrote: > Incidently the workdir is perl - not perl-5.8.1 Yes, that's why I provided this line for build.table in my original post:- perl;perl;http://www.iki.fi/jhi/perl at 19105.tgz;;;. The second field is the name of the directory that the archive extracts to. It is only provided when it differs from the name of the archive itself. > -- > Regards > > Dave Saville -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 16:48:18 -0500 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: Building Apache Mika Laitio wrote: > > Does anybody know how te compiler is identified to be EMX. __EMX__ is predefined. h~ _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 23:15:24 +0300 (EEST) From: Mika Laitio Subject: Re: Building Apache > By removing that EMX-specific define from Apache source code, > _that_ error should go away (possible other errors won't, though), > but then it would no longer compile with plain EMX ... Does anybody know how te compiler is identified to be EMX. If the compiler would claim to be something else than EMX in the UX2BS build system then all these #ifdef emx code blocks would be ignored during the UXBS2 build... Mika _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs