Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 00:07:05 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 282 ************************************************** Sunday 14 March 2004 Number 282 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Any success? : John Poltorak 2 Re: Any success? : Jeff Robinson 3 Re: Any success? : John Poltorak 4 Re: Any success? : Adrian Gschwend" 5 Re: Any success? : Adrian Gschwend" 6 Re: Any success? : John Poltorak 7 Re: Any success? : John Poltorak 8 Re: Any success? : Jeff Robinson 9 Re: Any success? : Dave and Natalie" 10 Re: Any success? : John Poltorak 11 Re: Any success? : Adrian Gschwend" 12 Building GROFF : John Poltorak 13 Re: Any success? : Dave and Natalie" 14 Re: Any success? : John Poltorak 16 Re: Any success? : Adrian Gschwend" **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:30:15 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Any success? Has anyone tried UX2BS recently? I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any success recently? Sometime soon, I'd like to start adding a few XWindows apps now that there is a FHS compliant XFree86OS/2. I haven't yet worked out what additional files would be required to start building X apps, so if anyone could give me a list that would by useful, as well as a small test app to see how easy it is to build. -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:47:12 -0600 From: Jeff Robinson Subject: Re: Any success? John Poltorak wrote: > Has anyone tried UX2BS recently? > > > I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any success recently? > > Sometime soon, I'd like to start adding a few XWindows apps now that there > is a FHS compliant XFree86OS/2. > > I haven't yet worked out what additional files would be required to start > building X apps, so if anyone could give me a list that would by useful, > as well as a small test app to see how easy it is to build. > > I just started fresh and downloaded the latest UX2BS on Friday. So far I've only tried building perl... which seemed to go okay. (I have a running executable, at least). The only thing that was a bit disconcerting during the initial download process was that it kept telling me the download of source was failing all the time... but obviously work! 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 3 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 20:40:24 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 01:47:12PM -0600, Jeff Robinson wrote: > John Poltorak wrote: > > Has anyone tried UX2BS recently? > > > > > > I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any success recently? > > > > Sometime soon, I'd like to start adding a few XWindows apps now that there > > is a FHS compliant XFree86OS/2. > > > > I haven't yet worked out what additional files would be required to start > > building X apps, so if anyone could give me a list that would by useful, > > as well as a small test app to see how easy it is to build. > > > > > > I just started fresh and downloaded the latest UX2BS on Friday. So far > I've only tried building perl... which seemed to go okay. (I have a > running executable, at least). Is this Perl 5.8.3? Could you post the results from the test summary log? It should be a few lines near the end of \unixos2\log\perl.log which looks something like:- Failed 6/726 test scripts, 99.17% okay. 10/68650 subtests failed, 99.99% okay. Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t 1 256 17 1 5.88% 14 .../lib/Net/t/hostname.t 2 1 50.00% 1 lib/os2_process.t 2 512 227 2 0.88% 174 209 lib/os2_process_kid.t 227 2 0.88% 174 209 lib/rx_cmprt.t 255 65280 18 3 16.67% 16-18 op/stat.t 73 1 1.37% 44 64 tests and 561 subtests skipped. > The only thing that was a bit disconcerting during the initial download > process was that it kept telling me the download of source was failing > all the time... but obviously work! Was this an RSYNC error msg? If so it seems harmless enough and I have no idea how to get rid of it. > Jeff > > -- > ---------------- > Whatza JamochaMUD? > http://jamochamud.anecho.mb.ca > > Or other stuff: http://www.anecho.mb.ca/~jeffnik > ----------------------------------------------------------- -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:09:00 +0100 (CET) From: "Adrian Gschwend" Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:30:15 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >Has anyone tried UX2BS recently? just wiped out my stuff and trying a fresh install now >Sometime soon, I'd like to start adding a few XWindows apps now that there >is a FHS compliant XFree86OS/2. cute sounds great. I need a better window manager :-) >I haven't yet worked out what additional files would be required to start >building X apps, so if anyone could give me a list that would by useful, >as well as a small test app to see how easy it is to build. I would vote for fluxbox or blackbox as alternate WM. They are small, fast and handy. see http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net/ I think blackbox is stalled so probably fluxbox first. Blackbox claims to have OS/2 support and fluxbox is based on blackbox so it might work. BTW I still think we should try to get OpenSSH building on unixos2, I know nickk quite good so we could try to set that up with him. So far I still convert his binaries to a FHS-like package via some REXX script but that sucks a bit. cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend at netlabs.org ktk [a t] netlabs.org ------- Free Software for OS/2 and eCS http://www.netlabs.org _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:11:14 +0100 (CET) From: "Adrian Gschwend" Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:30:15 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any success recently? btw what I forgot, is the latest stuff from Knut included in that release? I mean latest GCC and all the nice ports of him of various tools/libs cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend at netlabs.org ktk [a t] netlabs.org ------- Free Software for OS/2 and eCS http://www.netlabs.org _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:36:55 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 11:09:00PM +0100, Adrian Gschwend wrote: > On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:30:15 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >Has anyone tried UX2BS recently? > > just wiped out my stuff and trying a fresh install now Yes, it's best to start afresh, although remember not to expect it to replace a production environment. There are still quite a number of parts missing. > >Sometime soon, I'd like to start adding a few XWindows apps now that there > >is a FHS compliant XFree86OS/2. > > cute sounds great. I need a better window manager :-) I tried Blackbox recently and it seems OK, although it would be nice if it complied with the new directory structure used by XFree86. I don't know the first thing about building X apps but if I can get all the required headers and libs, I'd like to think I could build a few X apps by running build Xapp > >I haven't yet worked out what additional files would be required to start > >building X apps, so if anyone could give me a list that would by useful, > >as well as a small test app to see how easy it is to build. > > I would vote for fluxbox or blackbox as alternate WM. They are small, > fast and handy. > > see http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net/ > > I think blackbox is stalled so probably fluxbox first. Blackbox claims > to have OS/2 support and fluxbox is based on blackbox so it might work. > > BTW I still think we should try to get OpenSSH building on unixos2, I > know nickk quite good so we could try to set that up with him. So far I > still convert his binaries to a FHS-like package via some REXX script > but that sucks a bit. Yes it would be nice if it built and installed as easily as it does on Unix. Maybe try 'build openssh' and see how it goes... > cu > > Adrian > > > > > -- > Adrian Gschwend > at netlabs.org > > ktk [a t] netlabs.org > ------- > Free Software for OS/2 and eCS > http://www.netlabs.org -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:40:49 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 11:11:14PM +0100, Adrian Gschwend wrote: > On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:30:15 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any success recently? > > btw what I forgot, is the latest stuff from Knut included in that > release? I mean latest GCC and all the nice ports of him of various > tools/libs I will include some of the stuff Knut has built when I can get it to build. First I need to create some patches. I'm particularly interested in being able to rebuild his port of GETTEXT. Maybe I should also add automake and autoconf although I don't know what changes he has made to the GNU source. > cu > > Adrian > > > -- > Adrian Gschwend > at netlabs.org > > ktk [a t] netlabs.org > ------- > Free Software for OS/2 and eCS > http://www.netlabs.org -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:58:53 -0600 From: Jeff Robinson Subject: Re: Any success? Hi John, John Poltorak wrote: > On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 01:47:12PM -0600, Jeff Robinson wrote: > >>John Poltorak wrote: >> >>>Has anyone tried UX2BS recently? >>> >>> >>>I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any success recently? >>> >>>Sometime soon, I'd like to start adding a few XWindows apps now that there >>>is a FHS compliant XFree86OS/2. >>> >>>I haven't yet worked out what additional files would be required to start >>>building X apps, so if anyone could give me a list that would by useful, >>>as well as a small test app to see how easy it is to build. >>> >>> >> >>I just started fresh and downloaded the latest UX2BS on Friday. So far >>I've only tried building perl... which seemed to go okay. (I have a >>running executable, at least). > > > Is this Perl 5.8.3? > > Could you post the results from the test summary log? It should be a few > lines near the end of \unixos2\log\perl.log which looks something like:- > > Failed 6/726 test scripts, 99.17% okay. 10/68650 subtests failed, 99.99% okay. > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ../lib/ExtUtils/t/basic.t 1 256 17 1 5.88% 14 > ../lib/Net/t/hostname.t 2 1 50.00% 1 > lib/os2_process.t 2 512 227 2 0.88% 174 209 > lib/os2_process_kid.t 227 2 0.88% 174 209 > lib/rx_cmprt.t 255 65280 18 3 16.67% 16-18 > op/stat.t 73 1 1.37% 44 > 64 tests and 561 subtests skipped. > Yup, this is perl 5.8.3, and here are the results from the log: Failed 7/867 test scripts, 99.19% okay. 173/79047 subtests failed, 99.78% okay. Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .../ext/IO/t/io_sock.t 60 15360 26 50 192.31% 2-26 .../ext/Socket/t/Socket.t 57 14592 16 28 175.00% 3-16 .../lib/Net/hostent.t 1 256 7 1 14.29% 3 lib/os2_base.t 1 256 19 1 5.26% 8 lib/os2_process.t 255 65280 232 248 106.90% 92 109-232 lib/os2_process_kid.t 232 6 2.59% 92 174 178 190 210 214 op/magic.t 53 1 1.89% 6 68 tests and 624 subtests skipped. > > > >>The only thing that was a bit disconcerting during the initial download >>process was that it kept telling me the download of source was failing >>all the time... but obviously work! > > > Was this an RSYNC error msg? If so it seems harmless enough and I have no > idea how to get rid of it. > I'm thinking it was probably related to rsync... I haven't really had much time to look into it at all, so can't say definitively if it is or not. But you're right, it seems harmless... just confuzzling at first. I'm hoping to try out UX2BS some more, but we'll have to see how time works out. 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 9 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:07:33 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:09:00 +0100 (CET), Adrian Gschwend wrote: > >I would vote for fluxbox or blackbox as alternate WM. They are small, >fast and handy. > >see http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net/ > >I think blackbox is stalled so probably fluxbox first. Blackbox claims >to have OS/2 support and fluxbox is based on blackbox so it might work. Both Blackbox and Fluxbox need a newer GCC then 2.8.1. At least PGCC 2.95. Blackbox 0.65 almost builds out of the box with the usual sh configure, make, make install though NLS is broken for make install (depends on symlinks). The only source change thats needed is feeding cmd.exe a C++ type string instead of a C type string. I did have a working Fluxbox though it did have a few issues but now for the life of me I can't get it to compile. I seem to of hit problems in stdcxx with Blackbox-CVS (0.70). Quite a few X apps seem to be C++ and 2.8.1 is getting old for them. Dave _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:17:41 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Any success? On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 12:13:14AM +0100, Adrian Gschwend wrote: > On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:36:55 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: > > >Yes it would be nice if it built and installed as easily as it does on > >Unix. Maybe try 'build openssh' and see how it goes... > > I talked to nickk about that, he told there are quite big changes for > OS/2 so it won't be that easy I fear. > > Will talk to him about that again If he has patches and a build script, it might be straightforward getting it to integrate into UX2BS... > cu > > Adrian > > > -- > Adrian Gschwend > at netlabs.org > > ktk [a t] netlabs.org > ------- > Free Software for OS/2 and eCS > http://www.netlabs.org -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:20:33 +0100 (CET) From: "Adrian Gschwend" Subject: Re: Any success? On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:13:14 +0100 (CET), Adrian Gschwend wrote: >I talked to nickk about that, he told there are quite big changes for >OS/2 so it won't be that easy I fear. What about XFree86? I have the icon but the xfree86/bin directory does not exist. and is that really FHS compilant like this? cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend at netlabs.org ktk [a t] netlabs.org ------- Free Software for OS/2 and eCS http://www.netlabs.org _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:24:04 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Building GROFF If anyone has a chance, could you try building GROFF using 'build groff'. It did build for me with one slight problem at one time but won't at the moment. I'd be interested to know how well it builds for anyone else. -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:21:13 -0800 From: "Dave and Natalie" Subject: Re: Any success? On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:20:33 +0100 (CET), Adrian Gschwend wrote: >On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:13:14 +0100 (CET), Adrian Gschwend wrote: > >>I talked to nickk about that, he told there are quite big changes for >>OS/2 so it won't be that easy I fear. > >What about XFree86? I have the icon but the xfree86/bin directory does >not exist. > >and is that really FHS compilant like this? We'll most likely need /XFree86 directory structure for a long time as so many things are built and installed there. Dave _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 10:35:16 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:21:13PM -0800, Dave and Natalie wrote: > On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:20:33 +0100 (CET), Adrian Gschwend wrote: > > >On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:13:14 +0100 (CET), Adrian Gschwend wrote: > > > >>I talked to nickk about that, he told there are quite big changes for > >>OS/2 so it won't be that easy I fear. > > > >What about XFree86? I have the icon but the xfree86/bin directory does > >not exist. > > > >and is that really FHS compilant like this? > > We'll most likely need /XFree86 directory structure for a long time as so many things are built and installed there. I'd like to draw up a list of X programs available for OS/2 and try and get them rebuilt with the new structure. It might also provide an opportunity to bring some apps uptodate. What would be involved in rebuilding Blackbox with the new structure? > Dave -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 16 ==========================** Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:13:14 +0100 (CET) From: "Adrian Gschwend" Subject: Re: Any success? On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:36:55 +0000, John Poltorak wrote: >Yes it would be nice if it built and installed as easily as it does on >Unix. Maybe try 'build openssh' and see how it goes... I talked to nickk about that, he told there are quite big changes for OS/2 so it won't be that easy I fear. Will talk to him about that again cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend at netlabs.org ktk [a t] netlabs.org ------- Free Software for OS/2 and eCS http://www.netlabs.org _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs