Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 02:47:15 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 174 ************************************************** Saturday 16 August 2003 Number 174 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Installing the UnixOS2 build system : T.Sikora" 2 update_base.cmd : T.Sikora" 3 build.lst problem area : T.Sikora" 4 Re: update_base.cmd : T.Sikora" 5 Re: gcc_inst.cmd and gcc.lst : James Moe" 6 build.lst fixed? : T.Sikora" 7 Re: build.lst fixed? : James Moe" 8 gcc_inst.cmd and gcc.lst : T.Sikora" 9 Re: Installing the UnixOS2 build system : Dave Saville" 10 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : Jeff Robinson 11 Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : T.Sikora" 12 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : T.Sikora" 13 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : T.Sikora" 14 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : T.Sikora" 15 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : T.Sikora" 16 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : T.Sikora" 17 baseline_inst.cmd : T.Sikora" 18 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : Dave Saville" 19 Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. : Sid Gale" 20 Re: UNIXROOT : Andreas Buening **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:26:00 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Re: Installing the UnixOS2 build system Dave Saville wrote: > Ted tried to reply to your direct mail but got > > Recipient: > Reason: 5.0.0 We do not allow spam. > > > Below is what tried to send you. > > > On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 18:34:01 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: > > >>>This is badly broken. >>> >> >>Hmmm.. I brought this up and everyone shouted me down that it was fine. >>At least I don't feel so crazy now. What can we do? > > > Dunno :-( > > I used to have an old version until my disk lost its root info. As it > was all downloadable I never bothered to back it up. I guess we need > to find a two or three month old copy of all the scripts and diff em. > - Does the server have any backups? > > I just unzipped John's old tree in unixos2/ux2bs/old Lot's of test stuff there. ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs/old I also put the 'new' ux2bs tree with the ports directory in ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs.test I did not finish all the port directories yet or change the scripts over to the new paths. I changed the build_perl.cmd configure script to: sh Configure -des -Dprefix=/usr -Dprivlib=/usr/lib/perl5 -Darchlib=/usr/lib/perl5/os2 -Dsitelib=/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl -Dsitearch=/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/os2 This is the Unix legacy positions for perl and works well like this on OS/2. No need to modify any perl scripts anymore with this. -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:36:29 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: update_base.cmd update_base.cmd calls these but most do not exist in baseline. Should I add them? call build autoconf-2.13 call build make-3.76.1 call build autoconf-2.50 call build automake-1.4-p5 call build make setlocal cd \unixos2\workdir\make-3.79.1 make copy make.exe \usr\bin endlocal call build byacc call build flex call build ncurses call build help2man call build autoconf call build gettext call build texinfo call build automake call build m4 -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:49:41 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: build.lst problem area build.lst is the problem area the first few always *fail*. build.sh is also a problem. It uses wget as a download method. What if you don't have it? If the src does not exist in %repository% it uses wget to get them from the build.table. Two cleanups suggested download and install both wget and rsync from the get go in bootstrap. Right now both rsync or wget stay in root. It should be moved to /usr/bin after it's last use in ux2_inst same with wget then we should have no problems. At least it will work in theory. I think the problem lies in the individual build scripts for these. pdksh unzip crypt regex perl -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:54:48 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Re: update_base.cmd T.Sikora wrote: > update_base.cmd calls these but most do not exist in baseline. > Should I add them? > > call build autoconf-2.13 > call build make-3.76.1 > call build autoconf-2.50 > call build automake-1.4-p5 > call build make > setlocal > cd \unixos2\workdir\make-3.79.1 > make > copy make.exe \usr\bin > endlocal > call build byacc > call build flex > call build ncurses > call build help2man > call build autoconf > call build gettext > call build texinfo > call build automake > call build m4 > Getting ahead of myself I'm going to rem update_base.cmd in ux2_inst till we get that straightened out. Once it all works it will be easy to move it to the new ux2bs.test tree. Just path changes will be needed to make it work with a ports directory. -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:08:43 -0700 (MST) From: "James Moe" Subject: Re: gcc_inst.cmd and gcc.lst -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:27:24 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: >Any suggestions on how to call the ux2_env with or without >ux2_env_gcc321.cmd after the ux2bs completes. A ux2_shell.cmd script >anyone? > I made a .cmd script to use with a couple of WPS objects: /* rexx */ x = directory('g:\unixos2\lib'); 'mode co120,43'; if ("gcc321" = cmdline) then 'call ux2_env_gcc321'; else 'call ux2_env'; 'cmd.exe'; The gcc281 object has nothing in the parameter field; the gcc321 has "gcc321". The .cmd script can also be called directly from the command, of course. - -- jimoe at sohnen-moe dot com pgp/gpg public key: http://www.keyserver.net/en/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 OS/2 for non-commercial use Comment: PGP 5.0 for OS/2 Charset: cp850 wj8DBQE/P8SrsxxMki0foKoRAkgNAKCEfBDWhWQ36sw/fevZhLzcqR3FwwCdHPR0 So9M3lfNvTmuIOGuvg9ZBL4= =5Fg5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:18:18 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: build.lst fixed? I changed the bootstrap with: echo get /pub/unixos2/ux2bs/build_system/lib/wget.exe >>ux2_ftp echo get /pub/unixos2/ux2bs/build_system/lib/cpprrt36.msg >>ux2_ftp echo get /pub/unixos2/ux2bs/build_system/lib/rsync.exe >>ux2_ftp echo get /pub/unixos2/ux2bs/build_system/lib/emx.dll >>ux2_ftp echo get /pub/unixos2/ux2bs/build_system/lib/emxlibcm.dll >>ux2_ftp and ux2_inst at the end before calling build.lst with rm \emx.dll rm \emxlibcm.dll mv \rsync.exe %uxrt%\usr\bin mv \wget.exe %uxrt%\usr\bin mv \cpprrt36.msg %uxrt%\usr\bin This should solve our immediate problems. Next problem areas will most likely be in the build scripts like scripts/build/build_pdksh.cmd Anyone want to try it? -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:20:00 -0700 (MST) From: "James Moe" Subject: Re: build.lst fixed? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:18:18 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: >mv \cpprrt36.msg %uxrt%\usr\bin > I recently discovered that .msg files are located by searching DPATH. I suggest changing DPATH in ux2_env.cmd to include whatever path contains the message files. set dpath=%UXRT%\usr\bin;c:\os2\system; - -- jimoe at sohnen-moe dot com pgp/gpg public key: http://www.keyserver.net/en/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 OS/2 for non-commercial use Comment: PGP 5.0 for OS/2 Charset: cp850 wj8DBQE/P8dQsxxMki0foKoRAtrhAJ0d3Y1zJANz9pPlD9+0q9rXnklMBQCgxI2k vKjirvd0xWG3LS5FiHfTFvY= =aIOg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:27:24 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: gcc_inst.cmd and gcc.lst I'm doing the gcc 3.2.1 install scripts now. The ux2_env_gcc321.cmd is in lib/. Any suggestions on how to call the ux2_env with or without ux2_env_gcc321.cmd after the ux2bs completes. A ux2_shell.cmd script anyone? -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 13:02:56 +0100 (BST) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: Installing the UnixOS2 build system Ted tried to reply to your direct mail but got Recipient: Reason: 5.0.0 We do not allow spam. Below is what tried to send you. On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 18:34:01 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: >> This is badly broken. >> >Hmmm.. I brought this up and everyone shouted me down that it was fine. >At least I don't feel so crazy now. What can we do? Dunno :-( I used to have an old version until my disk lost its root info. As it was all downloadable I never bothered to back it up. I guess we need to find a two or three month old copy of all the scripts and diff em. - Does the server have any backups? -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:02:23 -0500 From: Jeff Robinson Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. T.Sikora wrote: > T.Sikora wrote: > >> >> Sorry but the bootstrap is fuc*** stupid too. Who the hell does not >> have zip on their machine. If they don't they have no business doing >> this. >> >> Packages needed for the ux2bs: >> ux2_base.zip >> ux2bs.zip contents: ux2bs/install and ux2bs/ports directories (zipped >> and mirrored nightly) >> >> both installed in / >> >> then go in /install and run the ux2bs_install.cmd >> >> which calls the old ux2_inst.cmd. Don't forget this is for the >> 'average' user. Now that we technically dazzled ourselves with the >> bootstrap let's move on and do it right. >> > > Sorry for getting emotional. But we are the developers if we want to > automate the process for ourselves cool. But it should be designed for > the ux2 user first and foremost. Now that I re-thought it the > ux2bs_install.cmd(bootstrap will do it all). Yikes I need some feedback > on this. Well optionally this will do all but you can call ux2_install > after the base and do it also or anytime afterwards with the distro > installed? > As for the ux2_base.zip, why not make it a self-extracting .exe instead, and you can always have zip & unzip files inside it. Then it is self-contained and you're guaranteed to have those programs as well. Personally, what I would like to see with UX2BS (from what I've seen) is for it to only bring down the bare essentials of what I need to run (and compile?) the UnixOS2 software. The rest would be called down and compiled/installed at the user's request, maybe with some sort've dependency "system" in place. I like the unix-style concept of having a lot of little "simple" specialised tools that can be linked together to perform bigger functions. After playing with UX2BS a week or two ago, I found it worked very well on my system but I just got the feeling it was doing too much and didn't really know the state of the software on my machine after the install. Perhaps we can build up (or point me toward) some documents where we can spell out exactly what we're looking at right now, and where we'd like to be? Jeff -- ---------------- Whatza JamochaMUD? http://jamochamud.anecho.mb.ca Or other stuff: http://www.anecho.mb.ca/~jeffnik ----------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:17:39 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. We really need to rethink what were doing here. This thing is overly complicated and messy but it works. We are rapidly losing sight. We need to ask ourselves what is the ux2bs supposed to be? What is it's goal. Well it's supposed to be an integral part of the ux2 distribution, packages and all. It's also supposed to provide a development foundation for ux2 with a ports tree(ala FreeBSD) and be the standard for building OS/2 ports community wise. Am I right so far? So you should be able to install the base and install prebuilt packages or go in the /ports directory and build your own. So to use ports you need the install the base development packages first. This was Johns original plan. So you said it should be part of the ux2_base? Of course. If you choose not to do development work you just add packages. This will address Jeff and Sid's questions yesterday. We seriously need to design this around the installable ux2_base package. The ux2bs can be *optional for developers and it should and it does exist in the /unixos2 tree with 2 dirs. /install and /ports. The baseline is the 3rd party stuff that the ux2bs is designed on and just the bare essentials needed to build our own. I made a ux2bs.test directory in ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs.test all it contains is: unixos2/ux2bs baseline/ ports/ install/ ports and install are an integral part of the ux2_base package and it's own package.. ux2bs.zip. baseline is our 3rd party repository. To use ports and the ux2 development environment you optionally install the ux2bs.zip package after the ux2_base.zip package and run the ux2bs_install.cmd from /install. ux2bs_install(formally bootstrap) installs the wget and rsync packages from the distribution and emxrt.zip from ux2bs/baseline then runs the ux2_inst like it does but calling the build.lst from the /ports directory. What dou you think? ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs.test The existing bootstrap I'm modifying now will ftp uzs550x2.exe (baseline) ux2_base.zip (unixos2) wget.zip (unixos2) rsync.zip (unixos2) emxrt.zip (baseline) and then install them then and call ux2_inst.cmd -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:38:46 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. T.Sikora wrote: > We really need to rethink what were doing here. This thing is overly > complicated and messy but it works. We are rapidly losing sight. We need > to ask ourselves what is the ux2bs supposed to be? What is it's goal. > > Well it's supposed to be an integral part of the ux2 distribution, > packages and all. It's also supposed to provide a development foundation > for ux2 with a ports tree(ala FreeBSD) and be the standard for building > OS/2 ports community wise. Am I right so far? > > So you should be able to install the base and install prebuilt packages > or go in the /ports directory and build your own. So to use ports you > need the install the base development packages first. This was Johns > original plan. > > So you said it should be part of the ux2_base? Of course. If you choose > not to do development work you just add packages. This will address Jeff > and Sid's questions yesterday. We seriously need to design this around > the installable ux2_base package. The ux2bs can be *optional for > developers and it should and it does exist in the /unixos2 tree with 2 > dirs. /install and /ports. The baseline is the 3rd party stuff that the > ux2bs is designed on and just the bare essentials needed to build our own. > > I made a ux2bs.test directory in ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs.test > > all it contains is: > > unixos2/ux2bs > baseline/ > ports/ > install/ > > ports and install are an integral part of the ux2_base package and it's > own package.. ux2bs.zip. baseline is our 3rd party repository. To use > ports and the ux2 development environment you optionally install the > ux2bs.zip package after the ux2_base.zip package and run the > ux2bs_install.cmd from /install. > > ux2bs_install(formally bootstrap) installs the wget and rsync packages > from the distribution and emxrt.zip from ux2bs/baseline then runs the > ux2_inst like it does but calling the build.lst from the /ports directory. > > What dou you think? > > ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs.test > > The existing bootstrap I'm modifying now will ftp > > uzs550x2.exe (baseline) > ux2_base.zip (unixos2) > wget.zip (unixos2) > rsync.zip (unixos2) > emxrt.zip (baseline) > > and then install them then and call ux2_inst.cmd > > -- Sorry but the bootstrap is fuc*** stupid too. Who the hell does not have zip on their machine. If they don't they have no business doing this. Packages needed for the ux2bs: ux2_base.zip ux2bs.zip contents: ux2bs/install and ux2bs/ports directories (zipped and mirrored nightly) both installed in / then go in /install and run the ux2bs_install.cmd which calls the old ux2_inst.cmd. Don't forget this is for the 'average' user. Now that we technically dazzled ourselves with the bootstrap let's move on and do it right. -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:52:51 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. T.Sikora wrote: > > Sorry but the bootstrap is fuc*** stupid too. Who the hell does not have > zip on their machine. If they don't they have no business doing this. > > Packages needed for the ux2bs: > ux2_base.zip > ux2bs.zip contents: ux2bs/install and ux2bs/ports directories (zipped > and mirrored nightly) > > both installed in / > > then go in /install and run the ux2bs_install.cmd > > which calls the old ux2_inst.cmd. Don't forget this is for the 'average' > user. Now that we technically dazzled ourselves with the bootstrap let's > move on and do it right. > Sorry for getting emotional. But we are the developers if we want to automate the process for ourselves cool. But it should be designed for the ux2 user first and foremost. Now that I re-thought it the ux2bs_install.cmd(bootstrap will do it all). Yikes I need some feedback on this. Well optionally this will do all but you can call ux2_install after the base and do it also or anytime afterwards with the distro installed? -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 15:48:52 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. Dave Saville wrote: > On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:52:51 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: > > >>Sorry for getting emotional. But we are the developers if we want to >>automate the process for ourselves cool. But it should be designed for >>the ux2 user first and foremost. Now that I re-thought it the >>ux2bs_install.cmd(bootstrap will do it all). Yikes I need some feedback >>on this. Well optionally this will do all but you can call ux2_install >>after the base and do it also or anytime afterwards with the distro >>installed? > > > Ted > > I will let you play tonight and will download and try a fresh copy in > the morning - see how far I get with the changes you made. I don't > think there is anything much wrong with the pdksh etc scripts - I am > sure the baseline is not correct before they are called. > > But last night I populated /usr/bin with the missing bits and /bin > with sh and pdksh barfed in compiling. Mind you it is the first time > I have tried the build system with the posix2 stuff. > Anyone feel brave I changed bootstrap to ux2bs_inst.cmd It can be called with or /wo the ux2_base it checks if it exists. Without run from root. You can run it from /install with ux2_base installed. It should run to build.lst. I'm doing the build.cmd scripts in /ports now. ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs/build_system/ux2bs_inst.cmd It's extremely simplified and fits right in with ux2. After it builds the dev env. You want a port go in example; /ports/sendmail and run the build script. The ports tree can be refreshed from the master server with a ports_update.cmd ftp://os2ports.com/pub/unixos2/ux2bs/ All we need is that ux2_depend.cmd to check against the depend.lst in the ports directory. -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 15 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 15:55:33 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. Sid Gale wrote: > On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:52:51 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: > > >>Sorry for getting emotional. But we are the developers if we want to >>automate the process for ourselves cool. But it should be designed for >>the ux2 user first and foremost. Now that I re-thought it the >>ux2bs_install.cmd(bootstrap will do it all). Yikes I need some feedback >>on this. Well optionally this will do all but you can call ux2_install >>after the base and do it also or anytime afterwards with the distro >>installed? > > > I'm not at all sure I understand everything that's being discussed > here, but it seems to me that a likely situation is that someone will > want to install enough of UnixOS2 to be able to install and run > pre-built, Unix-derived packages. At a later stage they might decide > that they want to develop some stuff themselves, so it ought to be > possible to add the development environment to an already-functioning > runtime environment. This is how I thought the > ux2_base/os2libs/ux2_bootstrap stuff worked when I first looked at it. > I know and that's how it should work. It should now or it's on track. -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 16 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 16:09:50 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. T.Sikora wrote: > Dave Saville wrote: > >> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:52:51 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: > > All we need is that ux2_depend.cmd to check against the depend.lst in > the ports directory. > Future updates a pkg routine for build.cmd ? run: build build_perl for build and install (default) run: build -pkg build_perl to build the ux2 distribution package in /ports/packages -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 17 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 19:15:09 -0400 From: "T.Sikora" Subject: baseline_inst.cmd Where ever possible I'm replacing the stuff with the existing unixos2 packages already made like in baseline_inst. Kind of stupid to use the old gnu stuff from leo/hobbes. The packages were all updated ports made specifically for ux2. I use them all and they work perfectly. I always have trouble with the old stuff. If a package exists use it from the distro. They are supposed to be one in the same. Stuff buit into a package from ports. If that's not feasible then the old leo/hobbes stuff as a last resort. -- T.Sikora tsikora at ntplx dot net _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 18 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 19:55:47 +0100 (BST) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:52:51 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: >Sorry for getting emotional. But we are the developers if we want to >automate the process for ourselves cool. But it should be designed for >the ux2 user first and foremost. Now that I re-thought it the >ux2bs_install.cmd(bootstrap will do it all). Yikes I need some feedback >on this. Well optionally this will do all but you can call ux2_install >after the base and do it also or anytime afterwards with the distro >installed? Ted I will let you play tonight and will download and try a fresh copy in the morning - see how far I get with the changes you made. I don't think there is anything much wrong with the pdksh etc scripts - I am sure the baseline is not correct before they are called. But last night I populated /usr/bin with the missing bits and /bin with sh and pdksh barfed in compiling. Mind you it is the first time I have tried the build system with the posix2 stuff. -- Regards Dave Saville _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 19 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:32:04 +0100 (BST) From: "Sid Gale" Subject: Re: Urgent UX2BS rethink needed. On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:52:51 -0400, T.Sikora wrote: >Sorry for getting emotional. But we are the developers if we want to >automate the process for ourselves cool. But it should be designed for >the ux2 user first and foremost. Now that I re-thought it the >ux2bs_install.cmd(bootstrap will do it all). Yikes I need some feedback >on this. Well optionally this will do all but you can call ux2_install >after the base and do it also or anytime afterwards with the distro >installed? I'm not at all sure I understand everything that's being discussed here, but it seems to me that a likely situation is that someone will want to install enough of UnixOS2 to be able to install and run pre-built, Unix-derived packages. At a later stage they might decide that they want to develop some stuff themselves, so it ought to be possible to add the development environment to an already-functioning runtime environment. This is how I thought the ux2_base/os2libs/ux2_bootstrap stuff worked when I first looked at it. Regards Sid Gale _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 20 ==========================** Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 21:52:41 +0200 From: Andreas Buening Subject: Re: UNIXROOT T.Sikora wrote: [snip] > Well.... the distro and packages lets you define the UNIXROOT you can > just make that UNIXROOT=/ and it will all still work fine. I also > recommend we try to adhere to just paths with no drive letters. Most > unix ports really like it that way and it avoids embarressing problems > down the road like having to set the path to drive F: like in Ilya's > Perl port. I built Perl on ux2bs with the Dprefix settings and it works > exactly like it's Unix counterpart without env settings and even CPAN > works correctly. For shell scripts it's no problem to support "x:", "/", "x:/foo" or "x:/foo/" in UNIXROOT but for C it's a real problem because you need a huge overhead to handle all possible cases, and finally it's not failure safe. So UNIXROOT must be "x:" and nothing else. However, the long term goal is that all software packages use UNIXROOT and need no other env. var. :-) Bye, Andreas _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs