Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 00:07:07 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 252 ************************************************** Friday 02 January 2004 Number 252 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 UX2BS Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1 : ux2bs-request at os2ports.com 2 Re: pthreads : knut st. osmundsen" 3 Re: pthreads : Knut Stange Osmundsen 4 Re: pthreads : Knut Stange Osmundsen 5 Re: Any new UX2BS testers? : Knut Stange Osmundsen 6 Re: Any new UX2BS testers? : knut st. osmundsen" 7 Re: pthreads : John Poltorak 8 Re: Any new UX2BS testers? : John Poltorak 9 Re: Any new UX2BS testers? : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 10 Re: lib vs. dll (was: Re: [UnixOS2] Pine problem) : Stefan Neis 11 Re: Any new UX2BS testers? : knut st. osmundsen" 12 Re: Re: lib vs. dll (was: Re: [UnixOS2] Pine problem) : John Bijnens" **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:00:04 GMT From: ux2bs-request at os2ports.com Subject: UX2BS Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1 Send UX2BS mailing list submissions to ux2bs at os2ports.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ux2bs-request at os2ports.com You can reach the person managing the list at ux2bs-owner at os2ports.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of UX2BS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: pthreads (John Poltorak) 2. Re: pthreads (Dave and Natalie) 3. Re: Any new UX2BS testers? (knut st. osmundsen) 4. Re: pthreads (John Poltorak) 5. Re: Any new UX2BS testers? (John Poltorak) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:14:30 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: pthreads To: UX2 Build System Message-ID: <20031231221430.O81 at warpix.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 02:36:00PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:15:24 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >> > It looks as I'll need to add pthreads to UX2BS at some time. > >> > > >> > Where do I find the most recent version? > >> > >> Netlabs, AFAIK (ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/pub/pthreads). > > > >Is anyone able to do anything with any of the archives there? > > > >There appears to be something wrong with them. > > I managed to unzip 2 of the files. pthread-bjs-src.zip and pthread-bjs-bin.zip. The source file had to be handled > on the commandline as fc2 had problems Thanks, I managed to extract these two as well at the command line. There must be something wrong though since there are 40kB of nulls at the start. I tried building the source file but didn't get very far. One of the headers contains the line:- #include "../lib/sys/syscalls.h" which appears meaningless to me. > Dave > > New Email Address - please update your Address book > dave_yeo at paralynx.com -- John ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:11:14 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: pthreads To: "UX2 Build System" Message-ID: <20040101001455.CB9CCB8BB8 at joseph.ncoldns.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:14:30 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >Thanks, I managed to extract these two as well at the command line. There >must be something wrong though since there are 40kB of nulls at the start. > >I tried building the source file but didn't get very far. One of the >headers contains the line:- > >#include "../lib/sys/syscalls.h" > >which appears meaningless to me. You need to get pthreads from cvs at netlabs. They have a application there to do the cvs thing called NOSA (http://www.netlabs.org/nosa/) Dave New Email Address - please update your Address book dave_yeo at paralynx.com ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 05:40:04 +0100 From: "knut st. osmundsen" Subject: Re: Any new UX2BS testers? To: ux2bs at os2ports.com Message-ID: <3FF3A4A4.9050009 at anduin.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:38:20 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >> On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 10:19:58PM +0100, Adrian Gschwend wrote: >> >> >>> Knut told me he is working on it, also on libiconv. He does that >>> also for the new gcc compiler (remember, he is working for >>> Innotek, even if he does a lot of this stuff in his sparetime >>> :-). Also he is working on an up to date version of automake, >>> autoconf and libtool (IIRC). I will keep you up to date >> >> What is the point of producing new versions of automake and >> autoconf since they already work straight out of the box on OS/2? Nope. Still a few driveletter issues in autoconf 2.59. Also for the gcc/binutils build systems (where we have a selfcontained CVS tree), 'make install' doesn't do the trick. So, I've patched both autoconf/automake to use UNIXROOT to find any locations and to not have hardcoded interpreter paths. (I had to do this once for autoconf 2.13 and what ever automake I'm currently using for gcc/binutils.) >> Maybe libtool does too, although I've never figured out how to use >> it... Yeah, libtool is a funny piece of shell script. I've allready patched the in-tree libtool stuff for binutils/gcc, so when encountering it in gettext I figured it were time to take a look at the latest libtool version(s) and get it done once. (libtool is an interesting tool, only a pain in the a$$ to configure and run on OS/2 - wish someone could do an fast bash/ash/csh/*sh port with builtin sed one day. > > Autoconf and automake work pretty well here though configure has a > problem finding the X libs and Headers when using Innoteks gcc 3.22. > This can be worked around by passing configure the locations of the X > libs and headers. Libtool works quite well for producing static libs > but I've only had one DLL successfully built by libtool, libiconv > 1.8. Usually libtool complains about not being able to build DLLs on > OS/2 due to OS/2 not supporting unresolved symbols. I don't really > know if OS/2 does support unresolved symbols. I wondered about that too... depending on what unresolved symbols means. I mean OS/2 doesn't require a .DLL to have not imports, but then you'll need to link it with all import or static libs. I'm trying to figure it out. Still need a couple of days to beat it around and get the testsuite going. The goal is to get make it produce static lib and .dll with import lib. The reason I'm looking at gettext is simply that neither of the intl or xgettext/mkmsg/whatever-gettext-tool I'm installing in my tree seems to like each other or the files I'm processing. So, I need a new set of tools which I can debug and fix now in order to get the tree building again (trouble started when we ported binutils 2.14). Kind Regards, knut PS. If there is issues on the innotek libc, gcc or binutils please put me on cc with the bird at anduin dot net address (no dash something) as I might easily miss it elsewise. ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 10:01:06 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: pthreads To: UX2 Build System Message-ID: <20040101100106.Q81 at warpix.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 04:11:14PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:14:30 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >Thanks, I managed to extract these two as well at the command line. There > >must be something wrong though since there are 40kB of nulls at the start. > > > >I tried building the source file but didn't get very far. One of the > >headers contains the line:- > > > >#include "../lib/sys/syscalls.h" > > > >which appears meaningless to me. > > You need to get pthreads from cvs at netlabs. They have a application there to do the cvs thing called NOSA (http://www.netlabs.org/nosa/) I couldn't see any link to pthreads... > Dave > > New Email Address - please update your Address book > dave_yeo at paralynx.com ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:42:45 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Any new UX2BS testers? To: UX2 Build System Message-ID: <20040101124245.T81 at warpix.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 05:40:04AM +0100, knut st. osmundsen wrote: > >>> Knut told me he is working on it, also on libiconv. He does that > >>> also for the new gcc compiler (remember, he is working for > >>> Innotek, even if he does a lot of this stuff in his sparetime > >>> :-). Also he is working on an up to date version of automake, > >>> autoconf and libtool (IIRC). I will keep you up to date > >> > >> What is the point of producing new versions of automake and > >> autoconf since they already work straight out of the box on OS/2? > Nope. Still a few driveletter issues in autoconf 2.59. Does Andreas Buening know about these problems? I thought he had manage to get all outstanding OS/2 issues sorted out. And are your changes going to be incorporated into the mainstream version? If not then it will mean a constant catch up process in v2.60 and every subsequent release. > Also for the > gcc/binutils build systems (where we have a selfcontained CVS tree), > 'make install' doesn't do the trick. So, I've patched both > autoconf/automake to use UNIXROOT to find any locations and to not have > hardcoded interpreter paths. (I had to do this once for autoconf 2.13 > and what ever automake I'm currently using for gcc/binutils.) Where are these patches? > >> Maybe libtool does too, although I've never figured out how to use > >> it... > Yeah, libtool is a funny piece of shell script. I've allready patched > the in-tree libtool stuff for binutils/gcc, so when encountering it in > gettext I figured it were time to take a look at the latest libtool > version(s) and get it done once. (libtool is an interesting tool, only a > pain in the a$$ to configure and run on OS/2 I wish someone would provide a guide to libtool for OS/2 users. I keep looking at it but have never really gained any understanding of how it works or what it does. > The goal is to get make it produce static lib and .dll with import lib. Do we have anything like a naming convention for static and import libs? And how do I recognise which is which? > The reason I'm looking at gettext is simply that neither of the intl or > xgettext/mkmsg/whatever-gettext-tool I'm installing in my tree seems to > like each other or the files I'm processing. I have problems building gettext, or more specifically intl and have no idea about what is going wrong > So, I need a new set of > tools which I can debug and fix now in order to get the tree building > again (trouble started when we ported binutils 2.14). I'm hoping that UX2BS is able to provide the latest toolset. I'm surprised about the issues you have with autoconf and automake. Can you provide examples of apps which cause problems? > Kind Regards, > knut > > PS. If there is issues on the innotek libc, gcc or binutils please put > me on cc with the bird at anduin dot net address (no dash something) as > I might easily miss it elsewise. -- John ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs End of UX2BS Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1 ************************************ **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:18:36 +0100 From: "knut st. osmundsen" Subject: Re: pthreads John Poltorak wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 04:11:14PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > I couldn't see any link to pthreads... cvs -d:pserver:anoncvsd at cvs.netlabs.org:/netlabs.cvs/pthread Kind Regards, knut _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:15:43 +0100 From: Knut Stange Osmundsen Subject: Re: pthreads John Poltorak wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 04:11:14PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > >>On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:14:30 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> >> >>>Thanks, I managed to extract these two as well at the command line. There >>>must be something wrong though since there are 40kB of nulls at the start. >>> >>>I tried building the source file but didn't get very far. One of the >>>headers contains the line:- >>> >>>#include "../lib/sys/syscalls.h" >>> >>>which appears meaningless to me. >> >>You need to get pthreads from cvs at netlabs. They have a application there to do the cvs thing called NOSA (http://www.netlabs.org/nosa/) > > > I couldn't see any link to pthreads... cvs -d:pserver:anoncvsd at cvs.netlabs.org:/netlabs.cvs/pthread Kind Regards, knut _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:16:44 +0100 From: Knut Stange Osmundsen Subject: Re: pthreads John Poltorak wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 04:11:14PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > >>On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:14:30 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >> >> >>>Thanks, I managed to extract these two as well at the command line. There >>>must be something wrong though since there are 40kB of nulls at the start. >>> >>>I tried building the source file but didn't get very far. One of the >>>headers contains the line:- >>> >>>#include "../lib/sys/syscalls.h" >>> >>>which appears meaningless to me. >> >>You need to get pthreads from cvs at netlabs. They have a application there to do the cvs thing called NOSA (http://www.netlabs.org/nosa/) > > > I couldn't see any link to pthreads... > > > >>Dave >> >>New Email Address - please update your Address book >> dave_yeo at paralynx.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > UX2BS mailing list > UX2BS at os2ports.com > http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:05:29 +0100 From: Knut Stange Osmundsen Subject: Re: Any new UX2BS testers? John Poltorak wrote: > On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 05:40:04AM +0100, knut st. osmundsen wrote: > >>>>> Knut told me he is working on it, also on libiconv. He does >>>>> that also for the new gcc compiler (remember, he is working >>>>> for Innotek, even if he does a lot of this stuff in his >>>>> sparetime :-). Also he is working on an up to date version of >>>>> automake, autoconf and libtool (IIRC). I will keep you up to >>>>> date >>>> >>>> What is the point of producing new versions of automake and >>>> autoconf since they already work straight out of the box on >>>> OS/2? >> >> Nope. Still a few driveletter issues in autoconf 2.59. > > > Does Andreas Buening know about these problems? I thought he had > manage to get all outstanding OS/2 issues sorted out. And are your > changes going to be incorporated into the mainstream version? If not > then it will mean a constant catch up process in v2.60 and every > subsequent release. I'm sort of surpriced about some of these issues myself as there is another platform with driveletters called Windows around. One or two of these problems were, IIRC, related to objdir!=srcdir. >> Also for the gcc/binutils build systems (where we have a >> selfcontained CVS tree), 'make install' doesn't do the trick. So, >> I've patched both autoconf/automake to use UNIXROOT to find any >> locations and to not have hardcoded interpreter paths. (I had to do >> this once for autoconf 2.13 and what ever automake I'm currently >> using for gcc/binutils.) > > Where are these patches? In my local CVS ATM. I need to get home to a decent computer and put the stuff thru a full gcc/binutils/emx bootstrapping before I put anything out. >>>> Maybe libtool does too, although I've never figured out how to >>>> use it... >> >> Yeah, libtool is a funny piece of shell script. I've allready >> patched the in-tree libtool stuff for binutils/gcc, so when >> encountering it in gettext I figured it were time to take a look at >> the latest libtool version(s) and get it done once. (libtool is an >> interesting tool, only a pain in the a$$ to configure and run on >> OS/2 > > > I wish someone would provide a guide to libtool for OS/2 users. I > keep looking at it but have never really gained any understanding of > how it works or what it does. The manual is very good: http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual.html >> The goal is to get make it produce static lib and .dll with import >> lib. > > > Do we have anything like a naming convention for static and import > libs? > > And how do I recognise which is which? That's one of the thing I have to figure out. >> The reason I'm looking at gettext is simply that neither of the >> intl or xgettext/mkmsg/whatever-gettext-tool I'm installing in my >> tree seems to like each other or the files I'm processing. > > > I have problems building gettext, or more specifically intl and have > no idea about what is going wrong I've got a .libs/intl.a here with 0.12.1 gettext. That wasn't too hard to do, but I wanna have a intl1C.dll too. >> So, I need a new set of tools which I can debug and fix now in >> order to get the tree building again (trouble started when we >> ported binutils 2.14). > > > I'm hoping that UX2BS is able to provide the latest toolset. I'm > surprised about the issues you have with autoconf and automake. Can > you provide examples of apps which cause problems? The fact that I had to do a make install on autoconf made it pretty useless for me as I'm not using it in a strict UnixOS2 conforming environment where UNIXROOT is always on the same drive or even just a drive (it's a drive+path). I also imagin the mozilla guys would have difficulties using that autoconf port for the same reasons. Kind Regards, knut _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:27:50 +0100 From: "knut st. osmundsen" Subject: Re: Any new UX2BS testers? John Poltorak wrote: > On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 05:40:04AM +0100, knut st. osmundsen wrote: > >>>>> Knut told me he is working on it, also on libiconv. He does >>>>> that also for the new gcc compiler (remember, he is working >>>>> for Innotek, even if he does a lot of this stuff in his >>>>> sparetime :-). Also he is working on an up to date version of >>>>> automake, autoconf and libtool (IIRC). I will keep you up to >>>>> date >>>> >>>> What is the point of producing new versions of automake and >>>> autoconf since they already work straight out of the box on >>>> OS/2? >> >> Nope. Still a few driveletter issues in autoconf 2.59. > > > Does Andreas Buening know about these problems? I thought he had > manage to get all outstanding OS/2 issues sorted out. And are your > changes going to be incorporated into the mainstream version? If not > then it will mean a constant catch up process in v2.60 and every > subsequent release. I'm sort of surprised about some of these issues myself as there is another platform with driveletters called Windows around. One or two of these problems were, IIRC, related to objdir!=srcdir. I don't mind playing catchup with the the original if the changes are as few as these. I'm not sure they'll welcome some of my UNIXROOT patches, nor I'm a sure about if they like Andreas/my abs. path check extensions. >> Also for the gcc/binutils build systems (where we have a >> selfcontained CVS tree), 'make install' doesn't do the trick. So, >> I've patched both autoconf/automake to use UNIXROOT to find any >> locations and to not have hardcoded interpreter paths. (I had to do >> this once for autoconf 2.13 and what ever automake I'm currently >> using for gcc/binutils.) > > > Where are these patches? In my local CVS ATM. I need to get home to a decent computer and put the stuff thru a full gcc/binutils/emx bootstrapping before I put anything out. >>>> Maybe libtool does too, although I've never figured out how to >>>> use it... >> >> Yeah, libtool is a funny piece of shell script. I've allready >> patched the in-tree libtool stuff for binutils/gcc, so when >> encountering it in gettext I figured it were time to take a look at >> the latest libtool version(s) and get it done once. (libtool is an >> interesting tool, only a pain in the a$$ to configure and run on >> OS/2 > > > I wish someone would provide a guide to libtool for OS/2 users. I > keep looking at it but have never really gained any understanding of > how it works or what it does. The manual is very good: http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual.html >> The goal is to get make it produce static lib and .dll with import >> lib. > > > Do we have anything like a naming convention for static and import > libs? > > And how do I recognise which is which? That's one of the thing I'll have to figure out tonight. >> The reason I'm looking at gettext is simply that neither of the >> intl or xgettext/mkmsg/whatever-gettext-tool I'm installing in my >> tree seems to like each other or the files I'm processing. > > > I have problems building gettext, or more specifically intl and have > no idea about what is going wrong I've got a .libs/intl.a here with 0.12.1 gettext. That wasn't too hard to do, but I wanna have a intl1C.dll too. >> So, I need a new set of tools which I can debug and fix now in >> order to get the tree building again (trouble started when we >> ported binutils 2.14). > > > I'm hoping that UX2BS is able to provide the latest toolset. I'm > surprised about the issues you have with autoconf and automake. Can > you provide examples of apps which cause problems? The fact that I had to do a make install on autoconf made it pretty useless for me as I'm not using it in a strict UnixOS2 conforming environment where UNIXROOT is always on the same drive or even just a drive (it's a drive+path). I also imagin the mozilla guys would have difficulties using that autoconf port for the same reasons. Besides, I don't recall seeing all the changes Andreas made in the 2.59 tarball. Kind Regards, knut _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 17:34:50 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: pthreads On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 06:18:36PM +0100, knut st. osmundsen wrote: > John Poltorak wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 04:11:14PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > > I couldn't see any link to pthreads... > cvs -d:pserver:anoncvsd at cvs.netlabs.org:/netlabs.cvs/pthread Does a snapshot get produced periodically? I prefer to use a specific version if possible. I've also found another version of pthreads being maintained by the porter of XINE for OS/2. It seems that whenever there are multiple maintainers for any port, we will have conflicts sooner or later. It would be nice to get these two versions converged into one. > Kind Regards, > knut -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 17:55:29 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Any new UX2BS testers? On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 06:27:50PM +0100, knut st. osmundsen wrote: > > Does Andreas Buening know about these problems? I thought he had > > manage to get all outstanding OS/2 issues sorted out. And are your > > changes going to be incorporated into the mainstream version? If not > > then it will mean a constant catch up process in v2.60 and every > > subsequent release. > I'm sort of surprised about some of these issues myself as there is > another platform with driveletters called Windows around. One or two of > these problems were, IIRC, related to objdir!=srcdir. > I don't mind playing catchup with the the original if the changes are as > few as these. I'm not sure they'll welcome some of my UNIXROOT patches, > nor I'm a sure about if they like Andreas/my abs. path check extensions. I've often wondered if an OS/2 specific module could be developed outside of the Autoconf distribution but called by Autoconf if it existed. There may already be some site specific option available, for all I know. If this was available any non-generic changes could be incorporated into Autoconf without them needing to be accepted by the maintainers. > > I wish someone would provide a guide to libtool for OS/2 users. I > > keep looking at it but have never really gained any understanding of > > how it works or what it does. > The manual is very good: > http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual.html I have looked at this but am unsure about how it relates to OS/2. > > I have problems building gettext, or more specifically intl and have > > no idea about what is going wrong > I've got a .libs/intl.a here with 0.12.1 gettext. That wasn't too hard > to do, but I wanna have a intl1C.dll too. How can you tell that intl.a and intl.dll have been built correctly? I manage to build them using gettext 0.11.5 but I can't use the resultant libs to build GREP. I've no idea about what is causing the conflicts I get. > > I'm hoping that UX2BS is able to provide the latest toolset. I'm > > surprised about the issues you have with autoconf and automake. Can > > you provide examples of apps which cause problems? > > The fact that I had to do a make install on autoconf made it pretty > useless for me as I'm not using it in a strict UnixOS2 conforming > environment where UNIXROOT is always on the same drive or even just a > drive (it's a drive+path). UNIXROOT is not defined in UX2BS and doesn't present any problems. > I also imagin the mozilla guys would have > difficulties using that autoconf port for the same reasons. > Besides, I don't recall seeing all the changes Andreas made in the 2.59 > tarball. I haven't looked at 2.59 yet, although sometimes a redesign of some some code makes previous patches redundant. Which particular patches do you mean? > > Kind Regards, > knut -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 20:16:12 +0100 From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: Any new UX2BS testers? Hi, > I wish someone would provide a guide to libtool for OS/2 users. I keep > looking at it but have never really gained any understanding of how it > works or what it does. Welcome to the club... Actually, that's not a problem sapecific to OS/2 users - from the results I sometimes get even on Unix platforms, I sometimes get a feeling that even the developers don't understand it .... ;-) > Do we have anything like a naming convention for static and import libs? XFree86 uses something.a/lib (import) and something_s.a/lib (static). "dllar" seems to do the same thing. libz's makefile apparently generates zdll.a/lib (import) and z.a/lib (static). > And how do I recognise which is which? Import libs are smaller. For the files in .a format, you can use "nm" to look at the symbols, import libs have entries like > IMPORT#15: > 00000000 e ___MrmExit > 00000000 E ___MrmExit=Mrm_20.73 while static libs have entries like > FSErrHndlr.o: > 00000008 T _FSSetErrorHandler > 0000002c T _FSSetIOErrorHandler > U __FSDefaultError > U __FSDefaultIOError > U __FSErrorFunction > U __FSIOErrorFunction > 00000000 t ___gnu_compiled_c > 00000050 d ___xtransname > 00000000 t gcc2_compiled. Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 15:45:57 +0100 (CET) From: Stefan Neis Subject: Re: lib vs. dll (was: Re: [UnixOS2] Pine problem) On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Adrian Gschwend wrote: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:35:14 -0500, Henry Sobotka wrote: > > >This looks like a variant of yesterday's "zdll.lib" problem. Might be > >code for Win32 adding [_]dll to library names. > > can someone explain me the main difference between lib and dll? To be > honest I don't really get the difference between that. On Unix systems > I have the *.so files, what's the main difference to OS/2 DLL's and > what should we use for UX2BS (and unixos2 in general)? Actually, on Unix systems, you don't have just *.so files (roughly equivalent to OS/2's DLLs, I never really remember the fine differences as those are mostly irrelevant in practice), you also have *.a files (equivalent to "normal" or "static" *.lib files). I.e. DLLs contain functions that can be used by several programs and are loaded dynamically at run time, libs contain the same code, but it's linked into each program at link time, so each program contains its own independent copy of the "common" code - which is "obviously" inefficient, but see below. What additionally complicates the situation is the fact, that linkers on OS/2 are "too stupid" to directly handle DLLs the way Unix linkers handle *.so files. Instead, the only format they know how to handle is the format of *.lib files (and in the case of EMX of *.a files). So, in addition to the "static" *.lib files described above, you also have the "import" *.lib files which just tell the linker to put a reference to a specific function of a specific DLL into the code. Now as to what one should use: "static" libs are "obviously" inefficient, so the "obvious" answer is to use DLLs (and I'd prefer to follow XFree86's convention of having something.DLL and "import" libs that are named something.a and something.lib and "static" libs that are named something_s.a and something_s.lib, if needed). However the drawback is that memory that can be used for DLLs (or for some specific part of each DLL, I don't really remember the details) is rather limited and they always consume a rather large minimal amount of space (unless you play some extra tricks?), so having many small DLLs is a _bad_ idea as it causes you to run out of "DLL-memory", even if you have plenty of RAM left - famous problem when piping something through a whole series of those small helper programs from the various GNU utilities... So, if you have some large library, that's used by only a few programs, link it statically (i.e. no DLL). If you have a _very_ small library, that's used by many programs still link it statically, as size increase doesn't matter anyway, if it's not "too" small and used by "enough" programs, make it a DLL. HTH, Stefan -- Micro$oft is not an answer. It is a question. The answer is 'no'. _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 03:01:57 +0100 From: "knut st. osmundsen" Subject: Re: Any new UX2BS testers? John Poltorak wrote: > On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 06:27:50PM +0100, knut st. osmundsen wrote: > > >>> Does Andreas Buening know about these problems? I thought he had >>> manage to get all outstanding OS/2 issues sorted out. And are >>> your changes going to be incorporated into the mainstream >>> version? If not then it will mean a constant catch up process in >>> v2.60 and every subsequent release. >> >> I'm sort of surprised about some of these issues myself as there is >> another platform with driveletters called Windows around. One or >> two of these problems were, IIRC, related to objdir!=srcdir. I >> don't mind playing catchup with the the original if the changes are >> as few as these. I'm not sure they'll welcome some of my UNIXROOT >> patches, nor I'm a sure about if they like Andreas/my abs. path >> check extensions. I just saw Andreas had some views on extensions, I must say I share his view with _s.a for static and .a for dlls. But, I've got a little suprise for him, next gcc release will be able to link with .dll's just like one can link with .so's in linux. (This will ease my hacking on the innotek gcc specific libtools port.) For instance: gcc -o foo.exe foo.c /usr/lib/bar.dll > I've often wondered if an OS/2 specific module could be developed > outside of the Autoconf distribution but called by Autoconf if it > existed. There may already be some site specific option available, > for all I know. If this was available any non-generic changes could > be incorporated into Autoconf without them needing to be accepted by > the maintainers. There is no trouble maintaining an os2 branch of autoconf separate from the GNU one. CVS have excellent features for doing so. But what could go into the master Autoconf should be put there to minimize the effort. >>> I wish someone would provide a guide to libtool for OS/2 users. I >>> keep looking at it but have never really gained any >>> understanding of how it works or what it does. >> >> The manual is very good: >> http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual.html > > > I have looked at this but am unsure about how it relates to OS/2. It relates to libtool, if you wanna understand how it works that's where to find the best description (however it's abit long perhaps). An OS/2 will of course try to adhert to the intended behaviour described in the manual / observed on other platforms. >>> I have problems building gettext, or more specifically intl and >>> have no idea about what is going wrong >> >> I've got a .libs/intl.a here with 0.12.1 gettext. That wasn't too >> hard to do, but I wanna have a intl1C.dll too. > > How can you tell that intl.a and intl.dll have been built correctly? There is a testsuite in gettext-tools/tests in 0.12.1, not sure if it covers the intl lib too (I haven't got that far yet). > I manage to build them using gettext 0.11.5 but I can't use the > resultant libs to build GREP. I've no idea about what is causing the > conflicts I get. I guess you've made sure you're actually using the correct intl.dll (as there is at least two different, possibly incompatible, dlls by that name). >>> I'm hoping that UX2BS is able to provide the latest toolset. I'm >>> surprised about the issues you have with autoconf and automake. >>> Can you provide examples of apps which cause problems? >> >> The fact that I had to do a make install on autoconf made it pretty >> useless for me as I'm not using it in a strict UnixOS2 conforming >> environment where UNIXROOT is always on the same drive or even just >> a drive (it's a drive+path). > > > UNIXROOT is not defined in UX2BS and doesn't present any problems. sure, but as I stated, I'm doing this so I can use it for binutils/gcc and possibly mozilla, which means there isn't anything like /usr/bin/ or /usr/shared/autoconf. However there is ${UNIXROOT}/usr/bin or just a bunch of AC_ environment variables. >> I also imagin the mozilla guys would have difficulties using that >> autoconf port for the same reasons. Besides, I don't recall seeing >> all the changes Andreas made in the 2.59 tarball. > > > I haven't looked at 2.59 yet, although sometimes a redesign of some > some code makes previous patches redundant. Which particular patches > do you mean? I don't quite recall details where what, I can do generate my own diffs and look, but several places where Andreas had changed something related to driveletters in his automake & autoconf ports I had to reapply the change because it wasn't there. Most of which were tests for absolute paths changing case testing for '/*)'. No big deal, just a little work (compared to figuring out libtool and building gettext). Kind Regards, knut _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 08:20:25 +0100 (CET) From: "John Bijnens" Subject: Re: Re: lib vs. dll (was: Re: [UnixOS2] Pine problem) Thank you for the explanation. Now the light is (very slowly) beginning to shine. Best regards, John Bijnens On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 15:45:57 +0100 (CET), Stefan Neis wrote: >On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Adrian Gschwend wrote: > >> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:35:14 -0500, Henry Sobotka wrote: >> >> >This looks like a variant of yesterday's "zdll.lib" problem. Might be >> >code for Win32 adding [_]dll to library names. >> >> can someone explain me the main difference between lib and dll? To be >> honest I don't really get the difference between that. On Unix systems >> I have the *.so files, what's the main difference to OS/2 DLL's and >> what should we use for UX2BS (and unixos2 in general)? > >Actually, on Unix systems, you don't have just *.so files (roughly >equivalent to OS/2's DLLs, I never really remember the fine differences >as those are mostly irrelevant in practice), you also have *.a files >(equivalent to "normal" or "static" *.lib files). > >I.e. DLLs contain functions that can be used by several programs and are >loaded dynamically at run time, libs contain the same code, but it's >linked into each program at link time, so each program contains its own >independent copy of the "common" code - which is "obviously" inefficient, >but see below. > >What additionally complicates the situation is the fact, that linkers on >OS/2 are "too stupid" to directly handle DLLs the way Unix linkers handle >*.so files. Instead, the only format they know how to handle is the >format of *.lib files (and in the case of EMX of *.a files). So, in >addition to the "static" *.lib files described above, you also have the >"import" *.lib files which just tell the linker to put a reference to a >specific function of a specific DLL into the code. > >Now as to what one should use: "static" libs are "obviously" inefficient, >so the "obvious" answer is to use DLLs (and I'd prefer to follow XFree86's >convention of having something.DLL and "import" libs that are named >something.a and something.lib and "static" libs that are named >something_s.a and something_s.lib, if needed). > >However the drawback is that memory that can be used for DLLs (or for >some specific part of each DLL, I don't really remember the details) is >rather limited and they always consume a rather large minimal amount of >space (unless you play some extra tricks?), so having many small DLLs is a >_bad_ idea as it causes you to run out of "DLL-memory", even if you have >plenty of RAM left - famous problem when piping something through a whole >series of those small helper programs from the various GNU utilities... > >So, if you have some large library, that's used by only a few programs, >link it statically (i.e. no DLL). If you have a _very_ small library, >that's used by many programs still link it statically, as size increase >doesn't matter anyway, if it's not "too" small and used by >"enough" programs, make it a DLL. > > HTH, > Stefan >-- >Micro$oft is not an answer. It is a question. The answer is 'no'. > >_______________________________________________ >UX2BS mailing list >UX2BS at os2ports.com >http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs > -- CAD/CAM Resp. KHLim - Dep. IWT, Cel Kunststoffen Website work : http://celkunststoffen.khlim.be Portal ProE : http://celkunststoffen.khlim.be/cad/ IRC : irc://irc.celkunststoffen.khlim.be/#ecs Nickname : Orac ICQ : 346927648 You might also want to try another alternative operating system eComStation : http://www.ecomstation.com http://www.ecomstation.biz _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs