Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 02:55:11 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 235 ************************************************** Saturday 22 November 2003 Number 235 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: building a2ps : John Poltorak 2 Re: building a2ps : Michael Zolk 3 Re: building a2ps : Michael Zolk **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 16:27:47 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: building a2ps On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 05:26:48PM +0100, Michael Zolk wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 03:09:43PM +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Michael Zolk wrote: > > > Hallo, > > > > > > after having installed ux2bs, > > > > When did you install it and how well did it go? > > Just a few days ago. I let it run unattended, when I came back the > installation seemed to have finished without problems :-) At least Perl was > built successfully. Is there a log file to see if there were any error > messages? You should see a log of every app built under \unixos2\logs and you may also get a log of the installation log in \unixos2\lib\ux2_install.log. > > > ----- a2ps.log ---- > > > Thu Nov 20 22:28:23 mez 2003 > > > ..Using Autoconf version 2.13 > > > > I'm not sure why this version of Autoconf is used. v2.57 should be the > > default. > > Should autoconf 2.57 have been installed automatically? Apparently I only > have 2.13 installed. > > And I noticed one more problem: The shell mangles the directory names in the > PATH. The old "\b" problem: > > g:.in;g:\usr.in;g:\emx.in;g:\usr\local.in; and so on > > Which shell is sh.exe? pdksh? The sh.exe used initially is an old PDKSH, but the first app built is the most recent version available. That should have no problems with '\b'. It sounds as though the build of PDKSH may have failed. > > Michael > -- > http://www.borashop.de -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 17:26:48 +0100 From: Michael Zolk Subject: Re: building a2ps On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 03:09:43PM +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Michael Zolk wrote: > > Hallo, > > > > after having installed ux2bs, > > When did you install it and how well did it go? Just a few days ago. I let it run unattended, when I came back the installation seemed to have finished without problems :-) At least Perl was built successfully. Is there a log file to see if there were any error messages? > > ----- a2ps.log ---- > > Thu Nov 20 22:28:23 mez 2003 > > ..Using Autoconf version 2.13 > > I'm not sure why this version of Autoconf is used. v2.57 should be the > default. Should autoconf 2.57 have been installed automatically? Apparently I only have 2.13 installed. And I noticed one more problem: The shell mangles the directory names in the PATH. The old "\b" problem: g:.in;g:\usr.in;g:\emx.in;g:\usr\local.in; and so on Which shell is sh.exe? pdksh? Michael -- http://www.borashop.de _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 17:29:40 +0100 From: Michael Zolk Subject: Re: building a2ps On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 10:48:20AM -0700, James Moe wrote: > On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:05:07 +0100, Michael Zolk wrote: > > >..extracting a2ps-4.13b.tar.gz into a2ps-4.13. > > > >gzip: stdout: Broken pipe > >tar: "gzip" exit status 1 > > > The archive extraction did not go well. Likely only a few files were > retrieved. I have checked this, and as far as I can tell all files from the archive have been extracted. Michael -- http://www.borashop.de _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs