Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 02:55:05 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 231 ************************************************** Tuesday 18 November 2003 Number 231 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: GETTEXT : Dave and Natalie" 2 Re: GOCR : James Moe" 3 Re: GOCR : Dave and Natalie" 4 Re: GETTEXT : Dave and Natalie" 5 GETTEXT : John Poltorak 6 Re: GOCR : James Moe" 7 Re: GETTEXT : John Poltorak 8 Re: GOCR : James Moe" 9 GOCR : John Poltorak 10 Re: GOCR : Henry Sobotka 11 Re: GOCR : John Poltorak 12 Re: GOCR : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:16:27 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: GETTEXT On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:53:41 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >If anyone has built GETTEXT, would you know whether is has built >correctly? > > >The build appears to run through without error, but I'm not sure that the >final outcome is correct, specifically intl.a. How could I verify its >components? Have you ran Make check? Dave _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:34:29 -0700 (MST) From: "James Moe" Subject: Re: GOCR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:17:36 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >You also need to copy src\libPgm2asc.a src\Pgm2asc.a, because the link >step does not recognise the library name. Is there any option available to >overcome this? > Which version of gcc are you using? I believe that v3.2.1 (and maybe 2.95) recognizes both xxx.a and libxxx.a. It is easy to modify ld to search for both variants of libs. May be worth considering for the ux2bs distribution. >The final program needs to have EMXBIND run against it. I notice there is >no EXEEXT in configure.in. Would it's inclusion sort out this problem? > No. It is a makefile problem. Changing Makefile.in should do it: Change PROGRAM = gocr To PROGRAM = gocr${EXEEXT} Often configure allows for non-unix systems by testing for executable extensions. Unfortunately the discovery is not carried forward to Makefile.in or Makefile.am. - -- 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/u6mlsxxMki0foKoRAv0LAJ0bsL6S7DwlVBPOGyXaG5N8rIPL3gCffX45 Q15trI15GBF3+Gmp7lZa300= =nifY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:12:33 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: GOCR On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:03:20 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >I added ld.exe from gcc v3.0.3 but that breaks configure:- > >checking for gcc... gcc >checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C >compiler cannot create executables Try passing -Zexe in your CFLAGS Dave _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:14:05 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: GETTEXT On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:45:03 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 07:16:27AM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: >> On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:53:41 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> >> > >> >If anyone has built GETTEXT, would you know whether is has built >> >correctly? >> > >> > >> >The build appears to run through without error, but I'm not sure that the >> >final outcome is correct, specifically intl.a. How could I verify its >> >components? >> >> Have you ran Make check? > >No. Would that tell me whether my intl lib has been produced correctly? > >I have tried checking it with EMXEXP and that produced no output, which >suggests, to me, that it was incomplete. Well if the tests pass then your intl.a must be correct. You could always move any other intl.a, intl.dll out of the way just to be sure Make check isn't using them. Might have to move intl.dll into libpath or change beginlibpath to include intl.dll Dave _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:53:41 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: GETTEXT If anyone has built GETTEXT, would you know whether is has built correctly? The build appears to run through without error, but I'm not sure that the final outcome is correct, specifically intl.a. How could I verify its components? -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 14:23:59 -0700 (MST) From: "James Moe" Subject: Re: GOCR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:03:20 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > >But there isn't anything which will resolve ${EXEEXT}. It is usually >configure.in which sets up this variable. > /sbin/ux2_config.cmd sets these vars. This may be another case sensitivity problem and autoconf is looking for $exeext, not $EXEEXT. > >I probably need to add AC_EXEEXT to configure.in. > That might work. Also, adding to the idea Dave mentioned about CFLAGS, add "-Zexe" to LDFLAGS. - -- 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/u99vsxxMki0foKoRAqk/AKCUGEaikj8xSHLETlOoPL749MA2NwCg5Vcc otNBKajK4LVne+xC4lS7ybg= =dq4+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:45:03 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GETTEXT On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 07:16:27AM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:53:41 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > > > >If anyone has built GETTEXT, would you know whether is has built > >correctly? > > > > > >The build appears to run through without error, but I'm not sure that the > >final outcome is correct, specifically intl.a. How could I verify its > >components? > > Have you ran Make check? No. Would that tell me whether my intl lib has been produced correctly? I have tried checking it with EMXEXP and that produced no output, which suggests, to me, that it was incomplete. > Dave -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:16:25 -0700 (MST) From: "James Moe" Subject: Re: GOCR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:23:30 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> Try passing -Zexe in your CFLAGS > >I wouldn't like to try doing that since I may have to change 100 apps or >more... > build.table allows adding spurious switches like this. No need to change 100s of apps. >However I have found a different ld.exe which seems to do the trick, but >am unsure of its origin. > >6-05-99 9:43p 36278 0 ld.exe > >Anyone recognise this? > Yes. It is from the pgcc distribution for gcc v2.95.2 (or is it 2.95.3?). - -- 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/u/nJsxxMki0foKoRAjV4AJ4879/+80ewn9wK2Su3HQVraWOS5gCffGV+ s4OcfGG/yvYELoNE3UHhquM= =819r -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:17:36 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: GOCR GOCR is an open-source character recognition, which has been built on OS/2 and I would like to get it to build using UX2BS. I've tried and it does go a long way, but there are a number of problems which stop it working fully automatically. There is a make.bat within the archive which trips up make. Getting rid of that isn't too much of a problem. You also need to copy src\libPgm2asc.a src\Pgm2asc.a, because the link step does not recognise the library name. Is there any option available to overcome this? The final program needs to have EMXBIND run against it. I notice there is no EXEEXT in configure.in. Would it's inclusion sort out this problem? -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:42:23 -0500 From: Henry Sobotka Subject: Re: GOCR John Poltorak wrote: > > However I have found a different ld.exe which seems to do the trick, but > am unsure of its origin. > > 6-05-99 9:43p 36278 0 ld.exe > > Anyone recognise this? > > It isn't one from EMX/GCC. It's from the then-new binutils package required for pgcc. h~ _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:03:20 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GOCR On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 10:34:29AM -0700, James Moe wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:17:36 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > > > >You also need to copy src\libPgm2asc.a src\Pgm2asc.a, because the link > >step does not recognise the library name. Is there any option available to > >overcome this? > > > Which version of gcc are you using? I believe that v3.2.1 (and maybe 2.95) recognizes > both xxx.a and libxxx.a. > It is easy to modify ld to search for both variants of libs. May be worth considering > for the ux2bs distribution. I added ld.exe from gcc v3.0.3 but that breaks configure:- checking for gcc... gcc checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables > >The final program needs to have EMXBIND run against it. I notice there is > >no EXEEXT in configure.in. Would it's inclusion sort out this problem? > > > No. It is a makefile problem. > Changing Makefile.in should do it: > Change > PROGRAM = gocr > To > PROGRAM = gocr${EXEEXT} But there isn't anything which will resolve ${EXEEXT}. It is usually configure.in which sets up this variable. I probably need to add AC_EXEEXT to configure.in. > - -- > jimoe at sohnen-moe dot com > pgp/gpg public key: http://www.keyserver.net/en/ -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:23:30 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: GOCR On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:12:33AM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:03:20 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >I added ld.exe from gcc v3.0.3 but that breaks configure:- > > > >checking for gcc... gcc > >checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C > >compiler cannot create executables > > Try passing -Zexe in your CFLAGS I wouldn't like to try doing that since I may have to change 100 apps or more... However I have found a different ld.exe which seems to do the trick, but am unsure of its origin. 6-05-99 9:43p 36278 0 ld.exe Anyone recognise this? It isn't one from EMX/GCC. > Dave -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs