Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:40:31 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 123 ************************************************** Tuesday 01 April 2003 Number 123 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 SH in /bin : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 2 Re: Building GMP (GNU MP) : Henry Sobotka 3 Re: Perl v5.8.1 : Henry Sobotka 4 new rsync problem? : Dave Saville" 5 Re: SH in /bin : John Poltorak 6 Re: Building Apache : John Poltorak 7 Re: new rsync problem? : John Poltorak 8 Re: Building Apache : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 9 Re: Building Apache : John Poltorak 10 Re: LD in config.site : John Poltorak 11 Re: Building Apache : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 12 LD in config.site : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 13 C++ standard libraries : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 14 Re: C++ standard libraries : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 15 Re: C++ standard libraries : Henry Sobotka 16 Re: C++ standard libraries : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 17 Re: C++ standard libraries : John Poltorak 18 Re: LD in config.site : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 19 Re: C++ standard libraries : John Poltorak 20 Re: LD in config.site : John Poltorak 21 Re: Perl v5.8.1 for OS/2 : Henry Sobotka 22 Re: C++ standard libraries : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 23 Re: C++ standard libraries : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 24 Re: LD in config.site : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 25 Perl v5.8.1 for OS/2 : John Poltorak 26 Re: C++ standard libraries : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 27 Re: C++ standard libraries : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 28 Re: C++ standard libraries : Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" 29 Re: C++ standard libraries : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 30 Re: C++ standard libraries : Andreas Buening 31 Re: Perl v5.8.1 for OS/2 : Andreas Buening **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:36:38 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: SH in /bin Hi John, why did you rem out rem cp -p %bld_home%/bin/sh.exe %uxrt%/bin in baseline_inst.cmd? Some configure scripts need sh in /bin/sh Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 01:07:28 -0500 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: Building GMP (GNU MP) John Poltorak wrote: > > Anyone tried building GMP? It was any easy build a few years back. Binaries may still be on Hobbes. h~ _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 01:32:48 -0500 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: Perl v5.8.1 John Poltorak wrote: > > There's a snapshot of the upcoming release of Perl 5.8.1 here:- > > http://www.iki.fi/jhi/perl at 19105.tgz > > I've been asked to provide feedback on how well it builds on OS/2. John, could you please ask your contact about adding -o $ at globally to the compilation rules? It's something that shouldn't harm any other platform that uses the GNU makefiles. On OS/2 it's essential for gcc 3.x builds, but the change itself is really not OS/2 specific, i.e. no ifdefs should be needed. thx, h~ _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 08:19:22 +0100 (BST) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: new rsync problem? I just tried to sync my system. Is this the standard rsync error - I cannot remember. [F:\unixos2\lib]rsync -av -ut --progress 213.152.37.92::build f:/unixos2 UnixOS/2 Build System --------------------- Downloads: receiving file list ... 124 files to consider wrote 67 bytes read 2534 bytes 247.71 bytes/sec total size is 1324477 speedup is 509.22 rsync error: error starting client-server protocol (code 5) at main.c(935) -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 10:04:19 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: SH in /bin On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 12:36:38AM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote: > Hi John, > why did you rem out > rem cp -p %bld_home%/bin/sh.exe %uxrt%/bin > in baseline_inst.cmd? It's something that I was testing which slipped out by mistake. > Some configure scripts need sh in /bin/sh Yes, I'm aware of this. Building PDKSH from source will install it in the correct location. I've decided to change the sequence in which the apps are built. Since PDKSH builds pretty easily, and is one of the most important apps in the build system, I think it should get build first, and then that build is used to build Perl. So, if you start from scratch, and run ux2_bootstrap, the build system will get installed followed by the apps in build.lst. I've now added PDKSH above PERL. This should get sorted out pretty soon. > Sebastian -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 10:28:13 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Building Apache On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:58:33AM +0200, Stefan.Neis at t-online.de wrote: > > 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... > > Note that we most probably don't want _all_ those > #ifdef emx > to go away (at least not yet), just those that add stuff > that's added by Posix/2 anyway... I think we need to aware of all the instances where we have ifdef's for EMX since I don't expect they are always used consistantly. Sometimes it is used to signify OS/2, so some OS/2 specific code may also need to be used by Open Watcom in due course. Sometimes it signifies EMX specifically because EMX is meant to work under DOS and NT, AFAIK. Sometimes it is used to signify a DOS filesystem (ie drive letters, and DOS dirseps and pathseps). I think we should be clear about these distinctions and perhaps look at ways of distinguishing between them. > Regards, > Stefan -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 10:48:12 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: new rsync problem? On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 08:19:22AM +0100, Dave Saville wrote: > I just tried to sync my system. Is this the standard rsync error - I > cannot remember. I think there quite a lot of error msgs generated, but appear to be spurious from what I can see. > [F:\unixos2\lib]rsync -av -ut --progress 213.152.37.92::build > f:/unixos2 > > UnixOS/2 Build System > --------------------- > Downloads: > > receiving file list ... > 124 files to consider > wrote 67 bytes read 2534 bytes 247.71 bytes/sec > total size is 1324477 speedup is 509.22 > rsync error: error starting client-server protocol (code 5) at > main.c(935) The main thing to consider is whether the transfer worked. You can usually tell by deleting a file at your end and seeing if it gets replaced after running RSYNC. > -- > Regards > > Dave Saville -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 10:58:33 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: Building Apache Mika Laitio schrieb: > Does anybody know how te compiler is identified to be > EMX. IIRC, it's compiled into gcc.exe that it sets those defines automatically... > 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... Note that we most probably don't want _all_ those #ifdef emx to go away (at least not yet), just those that add stuff that's added by Posix/2 anyway... Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:03:17 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Building Apache On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 11:40:59AM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote: > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 10:28:13 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >I think we need to aware of all the instances where we have ifdef's for > >EMX since I don't expect they are always used consistantly. Sometimes it > >is used to signify OS/2, so some OS/2 specific code may also need to be > >used by Open Watcom in due course. Sometimes it signifies EMX specifically > >because EMX is meant to work under DOS and NT, AFAIK. Sometimes it is used > >to signify a DOS filesystem (ie drive letters, and DOS dirseps and > >pathseps). I think we should be clear about these distinctions and perhaps > >look at ways of distinguishing between them. > > That would also mean more ifdefs with more global defines. I don't mean distinguishing between them in the actual source code, but from a conceptual point of view. It may well be that some ifdef's are no longer required because Autoconf can now supply the correct headers and suchlike. > I would prefer making OS/2 more and more Posix compliant, and removing > the unnecessary (and only those) ifdefs in new source releases of the > programs. Yes, I agree. > Or is anyone asking for uptodate support for DOS/NT EMX? Otherwise we > would have to differentiate DOS and OS/2 anyway. I have no idea about who uses EMX on DOS or NT, but apparently there is some support for these systems within EMX, that's why it can be confusing when there is a '#ifdef EMX' since it does necessarily just apply to OS/2, although I tend to view EMX as implying OS/2. > > Sebastian -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:12:31 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: LD in config.site On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 11:55:33AM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote: > Hi, > could we append LD=ld in config.site? I'd prefer to avoid that for the time being since this would be a global setting and may not be applicable in all cases. > There are some configures that cannot find ld.exe in path. What you can do is create a file - \unixos2\scripts\pre-process\APPNAME which contains:- export LD=ld That should be sufficient. Which app are you referring to? > Sebastian -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 11:40:59 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: Re: Building Apache On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 10:28:13 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >I think we need to aware of all the instances where we have ifdef's for >EMX since I don't expect they are always used consistantly. Sometimes it >is used to signify OS/2, so some OS/2 specific code may also need to be >used by Open Watcom in due course. Sometimes it signifies EMX specifically >because EMX is meant to work under DOS and NT, AFAIK. Sometimes it is used >to signify a DOS filesystem (ie drive letters, and DOS dirseps and >pathseps). I think we should be clear about these distinctions and perhaps >look at ways of distinguishing between them. That would also mean more ifdefs with more global defines. I would prefer making OS/2 more and more Posix compliant, and removing the unnecessary (and only those) ifdefs in new source releases of the programs. Or is anyone asking for uptodate support for DOS/NT EMX? Otherwise we would have to differentiate DOS and OS/2 anyway. Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 11:55:33 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: LD in config.site Hi, could we append LD=ld in config.site? There are some configures that cannot find ld.exe in path. Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 11:59:53 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: C++ standard libraries Hi, there are configure scripts that expect g++.lib or stdc++.lib instead of gpp.lib and stdcpp.lib. Should we make copies of those files? Are there differences (except the name)? Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:10:34 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) schrieb: > Hi, > there are configure scripts that expect g++.lib or > stdc++.lib instead > of gpp.lib and stdcpp.lib. Should we make copies of those > files? Are there differences (except the name)? None. FAT doesn't support "+" in file names, that's the whole reason behind gpp and stdcpp. So my first steps after installing EMX have always been to run longnames.cmd (or whatever the exact name) to get the "correct" names for all include files and to _rename_ gpp.a/lib and stdcpp.a/lib to their "proper" names. Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 15 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 13:11:06 -0500 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries Stefan.Neis at t-online.de wrote: > > Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) schrieb: > > > > Another candidate? > > cp gcc.exe g++.exe > > Not really. g++.exe/c++.exe are supposed to automatically > link stdc++.a, which a renamed gcc.exe won't do, will it? > So that would be more confusing than helpful, IMHO. Not to mention that g++.exe is part of gcc 3.x, and uses stdcxx.[a|lib]. h~ _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 16 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 15:04:08 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:10:34 +0200 (CEST), Stefan.Neis at t-online.de wrote: >None. FAT doesn't support "+" in file names, that's the >whole reason behind gpp and stdcpp. So my first steps after >installing EMX have always been to run longnames.cmd (or >whatever the exact name) to get the "correct" names for all >include files and to _rename_ gpp.a/lib and stdcpp.a/lib to >their "proper" names. Then let's do the same for Ux2bs, too. John? Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 17 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:10:19 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:04:08PM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote: > On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:10:34 +0200 (CEST), Stefan.Neis at t-online.de > wrote: > > >None. FAT doesn't support "+" in file names, that's the > >whole reason behind gpp and stdcpp. So my first steps after > >installing EMX have always been to run longnames.cmd (or > >whatever the exact name) to get the "correct" names for all > >include files and to _rename_ gpp.a/lib and stdcpp.a/lib to > >their "proper" names. > > Then let's do the same for Ux2bs, too. John? When UX2BS is getting installed it already runs something called long.cmd. See emx_inst.cmd. AFAICS long.cmd is included EMXDEV1.ZIP and is only used for renaming include files. I'm not aware of a cmd for renaming libs. If it does exist, let me know where it is and I'll incorporate it into emx_inst.cmd. > Sebastian -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 18 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 15:18:16 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: Re: LD in config.site On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:12:31 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> could we append LD=ld in config.site? >I'd prefer to avoid that for the time being since this would be a global >setting and may not be applicable in all cases. Could you give more details? What ld programs are possible for OS/2? >What you can do is create a file - \unixos2\scripts\pre-process\APPNAME >which contains:- >export LD=ld >Which app are you referring to? I'm trying to build ddd, a frontend to CLI debuggers like gdb. http://www.gnu.org/software/ddd But that problem occured on several applications I tried so far, and is getting somewhat annoying. Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 19 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:56:12 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 04:32:51PM +0200, Stefan.Neis at t-online.de wrote: > Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) schrieb: > > Warning: ambigous "to"s! > > Oops, yes, sorry. > > > Stefan does the lib renaming manually. > > Exactly. OK then, just to confirm matters, the following libs:- gcc.a gcc.lib stdcpp.a stdcpp.lib should be renamed as:- g++.a g++.lib stdc++.a stdc++.lib Any more? I'll update emx_inst.cmd to reflect this change. > Regards, > Stefan -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 20 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:08:06 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: LD in config.site On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:18:16PM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) wrote: > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:12:31 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >> could we append LD=ld in config.site? > >I'd prefer to avoid that for the time being since this would be a global > >setting and may not be applicable in all cases. > > Could you give more details? What ld programs are possible for OS/2? I think the problem is that the variable should not be needed. By including it in config.site we won't be aware of any apps which do need it. So far, the only one I'm aware of that needs it is RECODE. > >What you can do is create a file - \unixos2\scripts\pre-process\APPNAME > >which contains:- > >export LD=ld > > >Which app are you referring to? > > I'm trying to build ddd, a frontend to CLI debuggers like gdb. > http://www.gnu.org/software/ddd > > But that problem occured on several applications I tried so far, and is > getting somewhat annoying. Well it only requires the simple creation of a one line file... When you know that you can deal with it like this, it is only mildly irritating. AIUI requiring this variable is bad practice, so I think it's better to become aware of the problem by trapping it. Of course, if the number of these files becomes excessive, then we'll need to review the situation. > Sebastian -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 21 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:15:42 -0500 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: Perl v5.8.1 for OS/2 Andreas Buening wrote: > > Personally, I'd say we shouldn't treat the symptoms but the reason > of the problem. And that's gcc 3.x and not perl. How difficult can > it be to write a wrapper for gcc that does nothing but > > if (option_present("-Zomf") && !option_present("-o")) { > Add_obj_target(); > } > > ? And isn't gcc nothing but a wrapper for the "real" compiler? I consider OS/2 Perl's reliance on old gcc's default behavior a weak spot in its build system and the problem. OMF use of the .obj instead of .o extension is simply a convention. You can go gcc -c foo.c -Zomf -o foo.foo gcc -o foo.exe -Zomf foo.foo and get a working foo. So I don't see the change in gcc behavior as a problem, and am willing to accept Andy's reason for it: "The reason was that with the progress of gcc it becomes harder to incorporate the old kludges used for this (notably in the new C preprocessor related to the -M* family of switchs)." (emx/doc/gcc-3.2.1/os2changes). Also, based on my impression that most makefiles use the -o flag and with cygwin OBJ_EXT has become a common variable, I think a wrapper would be overkill (and require maintenance). h~ _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 22 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:20:15 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:10:19 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> >None. FAT doesn't support "+" in file names, that's the >> >whole reason behind gpp and stdcpp. So my first steps after >> >installing EMX have always been to run longnames.cmd (or >> >whatever the exact name) to get the "correct" names for all >> >include files and to _rename_ gpp.a/lib and stdcpp.a/lib to >> >their "proper" names. Warning: ambigous "to"s! ... to run longnames.cmd to get the "correct" names and to _rename_ gpp.a/lib to "proper" names. >AFAICS long.cmd is included EMXDEV1.ZIP and is only used for renaming >include files. I'm not aware of a cmd for renaming libs. Stefan does the lib renaming manually. Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 23 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:32:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) schrieb: > Warning: ambigous "to"s! Oops, yes, sorry. > Stefan does the lib renaming manually. Exactly. Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 24 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:34:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: LD in config.site Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) schrieb: > Could you give more details? What ld programs are > possible for OS/2? Well, "normally" you use gcc for the linking stage which then calls either GNU ld or link386 with suitable functions. Whatever autoconf actually finds out about ld.exe, it won't be much help for OMF builds. ;-) Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 25 ==========================** Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 17:04:59 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Perl v5.8.1 for OS/2 --EKKZAooU5GRPvFU2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Henry, I'm forwarding a reply from the Perl maintainer about your request... -- John --EKKZAooU5GRPvFU2 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Received: from smtp-2.hut.fi by mail.warpix.org (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 2.03/2.0) id QAA499.91; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:56:09 GMT Received: from vipunen.hut.fi (vipunen.hut.fi [130.233.228.9]) by smtp-2.hut.fi (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h32Fu6X4019432 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 18:56:06 +0300 Received: (from jhi at localhost) by vipunen.hut.fi (8.12.9/8.12.6/Submit) id h32Fu6pr011028 for jp at warpix.org; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 18:56:06 +0300 (EEST) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 18:56:05 +0300 From: Jarkko Hietaniemi To: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Perl v5.8.1 for OS/2 Message-ID: <20030402155605.GB8228 at vipunen.hut.fi> Reply-To: jhi at iki.fi References: <20030402093131.D82 at warpix.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030402093131.D82 at warpix.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.2(snapshot 20021217) (smtp-2.hut.fi) > John, could you please ask your contact about adding -o $ at globally to > the compilation rules? It's something that shouldn't harm any other > platform that uses the GNU makefiles. On OS/2 it's essential for gcc 3.x > builds, but the change itself is really not OS/2 specific, i.e. no > ifdefs should be needed. Well, the problem is that we can't really assume GNU make, Perl builds on dozens of platforms, so the Makefiles we generate cannot by default include any "GNU makeisms". So the change would have to be OS/2 specific. Secondly, I'm not certain what is meant by "adding -o $ at globally to the compilation rules". There are quite a few rules in the Perl Makefiles. I can *guess* that we are talking about the rules doing something with the C compiler, but they are more than one of those, too. I need something a bit more detailed. -- Jarkko Hietaniemi http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ "There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'. It is 'dead'." -- Jack Cohen --EKKZAooU5GRPvFU2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs --EKKZAooU5GRPvFU2-- **= Email 26 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 17:05:10 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:56:12 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >gcc.a >gcc.lib gpp.a gpp.lib >stdcpp.a >stdcpp.lib >Any more? I don't know. Stefan? Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 27 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 18:18:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) schrieb: [Any more files needing to be renamed?] > I don't know. Stefan? None that I'm aware of. With a g++.exe for OS/2, I wouldn't even have noticed those two files... Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 28 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 18:22:05 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW)" Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 18:18:09 +0200 (CEST), Stefan.Neis at t-online.de wrote: >None that I'm aware of. With a g++.exe for OS/2, Another candidate? cp gcc.exe g++.exe Sebastian _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 29 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 19:51:34 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries Sebastian Wittmeier (ShadoW) schrieb: > > Another candidate? > cp gcc.exe g++.exe Not really. g++.exe/c++.exe are supposed to automatically link stdc++.a, which a renamed gcc.exe won't do, will it? So that would be more confusing than helpful, IMHO. Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 30 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 20:53:53 +0100 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: C++ standard libraries Henry Sobotka wrote: [snip] > Not to mention that g++.exe is part of gcc 3.x, and uses stdcxx.[a|lib]. Great. Is there any reason why a C++ compiler should use one fixed name for the C++ lib as long as it finds its own libs? 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. _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 31 ==========================** Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 20:54:02 +0100 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: Perl v5.8.1 for OS/2 John Poltorak wrote: > > Henry, > > I'm forwarding a reply from the Perl maintainer about your request... [snip] > > John, could you please ask your contact about adding -o $ at globally to > > the compilation rules? It's something that shouldn't harm any other > > platform that uses the GNU makefiles. On OS/2 it's essential for gcc 3.x > > builds, but the change itself is really not OS/2 specific, i.e. no > > ifdefs should be needed. > > Well, the problem is that we can't really assume GNU make, Perl builds > on dozens of platforms, so the Makefiles we generate cannot by default > include any "GNU makeisms". So the change would have to be OS/2 > specific. > > Secondly, I'm not certain what is meant by "adding -o $ at globally > to the compilation rules". There are quite a few rules in the > Perl Makefiles. I can *guess* that we are talking about the > rules doing something with the C compiler, but they are more > than one of those, too. I need something a bit more detailed. Personally, I'd say we shouldn't treat the symptoms but the reason of the problem. And that's gcc 3.x and not perl. How difficult can it be to write a wrapper for gcc that does nothing but if (option_present("-Zomf") && !option_present("-o")) { Add_obj_target(); } ? And isn't gcc nothing but a wrapper for the "real" compiler? 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. _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs