From: Ranjit M. <rm...@ho...> - 2003-05-17 18:40:47
|
>It's me and it's patches again :-) I need them too! :-) BTW, just before (2003-05-01) the 3.3 release a patch was checked in that broke the otherwise clean GCC compile for MinGW out-of-the-box. :-( It's the definition of showmanyc_helper( ) in "libstdc++-v3/config/io/basic_file_stdio.cc" that assumes that ioctl( ) would be there if FIONREAD is defined (perhaps not unreasonably). For the moment, I have bypassed it by adding an extra "&& defined _GLIBCPP_HAVE_SYS_IOCTL_H", but is there a better way Danny? Ranjit. -- Ranjit Mathew Email: rmathew AT hotmail DOT com Bangalore, INDIA. Web: http://ranjitmathew.tripod.com/ _________________________________________________________________ Narain Karthikeyan. The fastest Indian. http://server1.msn.co.in/msnspecials/narain/index.asp Know more about him. |
From: Ranjit M. <rm...@ho...> - 2003-05-20 05:02:19
|
> > BTW, just before (2003-05-01) the 3.3 release a patch was > > checked in that broke the otherwise clean GCC compile for MinGW > > out-of-the-box. :-( > > > > It's the definition of showmanyc_helper( ) in > > "libstdc++-v3/config/io/basic_file_stdio.cc" that assumes > > that ioctl( ) would be there if FIONREAD is defined (perhaps > > not unreasonably). For the moment, I have bypassed it > > by adding an extra "&& defined _GLIBCPP_HAVE_SYS_IOCTL_H", but > > is there a better way Danny? > > > >There is no problem for native. FIONREAD is defined for mingw only if >you include winsock[2].h. Why would you include winsock when building >libstd++? Ahh, is is gthr-win32.h being included? Isn't it *supposed* to be included!? >Danny >Danny >Danny Ranjit Ranjit Ranjit :-P _________________________________________________________________ Beat the heat. Chill out in Himalayas. http://server1.msn.co.in/sp03/summerfun/index.asp Mercury Rising contest. |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2003-05-20 08:12:57
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ranjit Mathew" <rm...@ho...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Tuesday, 20 May 2003 06:02 Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] 3.3 patches > > > BTW, just before (2003-05-01) the 3.3 release a patch was > > > checked in that broke the otherwise clean GCC compile for MinGW > > > out-of-the-box. :-( > > > > > > It's the definition of showmanyc_helper( ) in > > > "libstdc++-v3/config/io/basic_file_stdio.cc" that assumes > > > that ioctl( ) would be there if FIONREAD is defined (perhaps > > > not unreasonably). For the moment, I have bypassed it > > > by adding an extra "&& defined _GLIBCPP_HAVE_SYS_IOCTL_H", but > > > is there a better way Danny? > > > > > > >There is no problem for native. FIONREAD is defined for mingw only if > >you include winsock[2].h. Why would you include winsock when building > >libstd++? Ahh, is is gthr-win32.h being included? > > Isn't it *supposed* to be included!? > Yes it is, but the patch I just submitted should prevent the definition of FIONREAD. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-05/msg01708.html I've given up on my experiment. > > >Danny > >Danny > >Danny > > Ranjit > Ranjit > Ranjit > Care to dance? > :-P > |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2003-05-21 02:30:51
Attachments:
gcc-3.3-20030515-1.diff.gz
|
Attached is my local patch for 3.3. It probably needs cleaning up a bit In particular all the libstdc++ cheaders=c and c-comaptibility header stuff only gets used (or works) with additional changes and the std-namespace branch of mingw-runtime installed. I'll try to upload this to SF if there are no problems here. I've copied this to Gareth Pearce as well as he has indicated interest in being cygwin gcc package maintainer. Danny |
From: Thomas P. <tp...@gm...> - 2003-06-30 09:33:18
Attachments:
URLClassLoader.patch
|
Danny Smith wrote: > Attached is my local patch for 3.3. It probably needs cleaning up a bit > In particular all the libstdc++ cheaders=c and c-comaptibility header > stuff only gets used (or works) with additional changes and the > std-namespace branch of mingw-runtime installed. > > I'll try to upload this to SF if there are no problems here. > > I've copied this to Gareth Pearce as well as he has indicated interest > in being cygwin gcc package maintainer. Danny, i am a little late but last week i have tried 3.3 with your patches on cygwin with c,c++ and java. gcc-3.3 + your patches has build successfull with cygwin binutils 2003-03-07-1 and c++ has passed the testsuite without problems. I had some trouble with java but after a small patch to URLClassLoader.java (attached) most of the testsuite has passed (cygwin seems to have problems with NULL Pointer Exceptions, therefore some of the tests have failed). The java interpreter seems to be broken on cygwin. I was able to build a shared stdc++ dll which has passed the testuite (only one additional test has failed because it is not possible to change the default allocator when using the stdc++ dll), but the executables have shrinked significantly. IMHO 3.3 can be used without problems on cygwin. Regards, Thomas |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2003-06-30 10:32:55
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Pfaff" tpfaff@..... > Danny Smith wrote: > > > Attached is my local patch for 3.3. It probably needs cleaning up a bit > > In particular all the libstdc++ cheaders=c and c-comaptibility header > > stuff only gets used (or works) with additional changes and the > > std-namespace branch of mingw-runtime installed. > > > > I'll try to upload this to SF if there are no problems here. > > > > I've copied this to Gareth Pearce as well as he has indicated interest > > in being cygwin gcc package maintainer. > > Danny, > > i am a little late but last week i have tried 3.3 with your patches on > cygwin with c,c++ and java. > > gcc-3.3 + your patches has build successfull with cygwin binutils > 2003-03-07-1 and c++ has passed the testsuite without problems. > > I had some trouble with java but after a small patch to > URLClassLoader.java (attached) most of the testsuite has passed (cygwin > seems to have problems with NULL Pointer Exceptions, therefore some of > the tests have failed). The java interpreter seems to be broken on cygwin. > > I was able to build a shared stdc++ dll which has passed the testuite > (only one additional test has failed because it is not possible to > change the default allocator when using the stdc++ dll), but the > executables have shrinked significantly. With way libstdc++ is changing, I feel queasy about dll's until we get some version-identification implemented for dll's. I've got libstdc++.dll for 3.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2,3.2.3., 3.3, and 3.3.1-prerelease on my box. I don't like it. > IMHO 3.3 can be used without problems on cygwin. Thanks Thomas. I'll upload a slightly revised patchset against 3.3.1 soon. Not much has changed. I've just reorganized and simplified (I hope) some of the old C++ dllimport local patches in winnt.c and added some warning,: so that - maybe- bug reports about C++ dllimport will be easier to handle. I'd also like to support NLS messages to mingw binary releases from now on, but still sorting out the dll-vs-static linking for libintl/libiconv. The latest official releases of these have much improved support for win32. Danny > > Regards, > Thomas > |
From: Ranjit M. <rm...@ho...> - 2003-05-21 19:14:41
|
>Attached is my local patch for 3.3. It probably needs cleaning up a bit >In particular all the libstdc++ cheaders=c and c-comaptibility header >stuff only gets used (or works) with additional changes and the >std-namespace branch of mingw-runtime installed. Using your patches (and Mohan's libgcj cross-configury patch) I was able to successfully build a C/C++ cross and C/C++/Java crossed-native GCC 3.3 for MinGW. This time I did not have to patch libstdc++ for ioctl( ) and did not face any other problems! Things seem to be working well in my smoke tests so far. I built these using mingw-runtime 2.4 and w32api 2.3 and with an additional "--enable-sjlj-exceptions". >I'll try to upload this to SF if there are no problems here. It'll be nice if you could incorporate Mohan's libgcj cross-configury patch (and maybe the two little patches I just submitted to java-patches, one of them being rather important vis-a-vis exception handling in Java). Thank you once again. Ranjit. _________________________________________________________________ Bridge gaps. Reconnect with old friends. http://www.batchmates.com/msn.asp On batchmates.com |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2003-05-21 21:32:39
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ranjit Mathew" <rm...@ho...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Wednesday, 21 May 2003 19:35 Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] 3.3 patches > >Attached is my local patch for 3.3. It probably needs cleaning up a bit > >In particular all the libstdc++ cheaders=c and c-comaptibility header > >stuff only gets used (or works) with additional changes and the > >std-namespace branch of mingw-runtime installed. > > Using your patches (and Mohan's libgcj cross-configury patch) I was > able to successfully build a C/C++ cross and C/C++/Java crossed-native > GCC 3.3 for MinGW. This time I did not have to patch libstdc++ for > ioctl( ) and did not face any other problems! > > Things seem to be working well in my smoke tests so far. > Thanks for testing. > I built these using mingw-runtime 2.4 and w32api 2.3 and with an > additional "--enable-sjlj-exceptions". > > > >I'll try to upload this to SF if there are no problems here. > > It'll be nice if you could incorporate Mohan's libgcj cross-configury > patch (and maybe the two little patches I just submitted to > java-patches, one of them being rather important vis-a-vis exception > handling in Java). > OK. Can you point to message for two little patches so I get the right ones. I've made a few minor changes to "my" 3.3 (adding missing warning for some dllimport overides). I'll submit those to GCC shortly for 3.4 > Thank you once again. > > Ranjit. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Bridge gaps. Reconnect with old friends. http://www.batchmates.com/msn.asp > On batchmates.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore. > If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your application fit in a > relational database is painful, don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. > Now part of Progress Software. http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |
From: Ranjit M. <rm...@ho...> - 2003-05-22 12:31:20
|
> > >I'll try to upload this to SF if there are no problems here. > > > > It'll be nice if you could incorporate Mohan's libgcj cross-configury > > patch (and maybe the two little patches I just submitted to > > java-patches, one of them being rather important vis-a-vis exception > > handling in Java). > > >OK. Can you point to message for two little patches so I get the right >ones. Sorry for missing these out: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q2/msg00271.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q2/msg00269.html And Mohan's cross configury patch is here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q2/msg00111.html (which requires regeneration of libjava's Makefile.in and configure) >I've made a few minor changes to "my" 3.3 (adding missing warning for >some dllimport overides). I'll submit those to GCC shortly for 3.4 This patch from you looked promising (and important): http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-05/msg01612.html I guess you are including that (and the promised follow up patches). Ranjit. _________________________________________________________________ Beat the heat. Chill out in Himalayas. http://server1.msn.co.in/sp03/summerfun/index.asp Mercury Rising contest. |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2003-05-22 21:54:51
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ranjit Mathew" <rm...@ho...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Thursday, 22 May 2003 13:31 Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] 3.3 patches > > > >I'll try to upload this to SF if there are no problems here. > > > > > > It'll be nice if you could incorporate Mohan's libgcj cross-configury > > > patch (and maybe the two little patches I just submitted to > > > java-patches, one of them being rather important vis-a-vis exception > > > handling in Java). > > > > >OK. Can you point to message for two little patches so I get the right > >ones. > > Sorry for missing these out: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q2/msg00271.html > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q2/msg00269.html > > And Mohan's cross configury patch is here: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q2/msg00111.html > > (which requires regeneration of libjava's Makefile.in and configure) > > > >I've made a few minor changes to "my" 3.3 (adding missing warning for > >some dllimport overides). I'll submit those to GCC shortly for 3.4 > > This patch from you looked promising (and important): > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-05/msg01612.html > > I guess you are including that (and the promised follow up patches). > > Ranjit. I've been neglecting 3.3 for awhile, because I think I've finally got a handle on the dllimport fuss in winnt.c, so I've been concentrating on working up patches and testsuite case for trunk. Do you think we should upload test release binaries now (Monday is earliest for me to do), to shake out unseen bugs exposed by user code? Danny |
From: Ranjit M. <rm...@ho...> - 2003-05-23 07:32:15
|
>I've been neglecting 3.3 for awhile, because I think I've finally got a >handle on the dllimport >fuss in winnt.c, so I've been concentrating on working up patches and >testsuite case for trunk. > >Do you think we should upload test release binaries now (Monday is >earliest for me to do), to shake out unseen bugs exposed by user code? IMHO, yes, if you are planning to put in your dllimport changes as well. After the pseudo-relocs patch in the current binutils, this would be the most important thing in 3.3 w.r.t. creating and using C++ (and Java) DLLs. Or do you want to postpone it for 3.3.1 when other changes/bug-fixes from "real world use" of GCC 3.3 also make it into the FSF sources? BTW, how do we plan to release this? Something like "core" (C/C++) plus "language packs" (Ada, ObjC, Fortran, Java)? The last time (3.2), I had "diff"-ed files from MinGW GCC 3.2 and my own build to get the "gcj3.2" files. This worked seamlessly since the core GCC driver automagically knew how to invoke the Java front-end when "gcj3.2" files were unarchived into the same location. In 3.3, the front-ends have been separated in a much cleaner way but that has also confused me - would the core driver know how to invoke the Java front-end if you (Danny) don't compile with "java" in your "--enable-languages"? The "default_compilers" array in "gcc/gcc.c" would seem to imply that this is not an issue, but "gcc/java/lang-specs.h" and the "gcc/configure.in" script's handling of "--enable-languages" muddle this up (for me). So Danny, do you plan to build all the front-ends (and libraries) together in one jumbo build? (If you take the patches I linked to in the previous message, this should be painless, except for the extra build time.) Or do you want us (Mohan and I) to separately build the "gcj3.3" files and upload "diff"-ed files as in 3.2? Will it work as well as in 3.2 then? Ranjit. _________________________________________________________________ Go where the action is. Get MTV Citibank card. http://server1.msn.co.in/msnleads/citibankcards/mtv.asp It's cool! |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2003-05-23 08:29:43
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ranjit Mathew" <rm...@ho...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Friday, 23 May 2003 08:32 Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] 3.3 patches > >I've been neglecting 3.3 for awhile, because I think I've finally got a > >handle on the dllimport > >fuss in winnt.c, so I've been concentrating on working up patches and > >testsuite case for trunk. > > > >Do you think we should upload test release binaries now (Monday is > >earliest for me to do), to shake out unseen bugs exposed by user code? > > IMHO, yes, if you are planning to put in your dllimport changes as well. > After the pseudo-relocs patch in the current binutils, this would be the > most important thing in 3.3 w.r.t. creating and using C++ (and Java) > DLLs. > Oh, I'll think I'll compromise a bit with the dllimport stuff and leave out some bits which look safe in simple testcases but... > Or do you want to postpone it for 3.3.1 when other changes/bug-fixes from > "real world use" of GCC 3.3 also make it into the FSF sources? My experience with 3.0 and 3.1 (and 3.2 which is really 3.1) is that the first round of bug fixes is quite significant. I actually would prefer to wait to 3.3.1 since I have a heeeap on at the moment and starting to feel the stress and then I make silly mistakes > > BTW, how do we plan to release this? Something like "core" (C/C++) plus > "language packs" (Ada, ObjC, Fortran, Java)? > I probable would keep ObjC and Fortran with core, since they are relatively small additions. So three packages. > The last time (3.2), I had "diff"-ed files from MinGW GCC 3.2 and my own > build to get the "gcj3.2" files. This worked seamlessly since the core > GCC driver automagically knew how to invoke the Java front-end when > "gcj3.2" files were unarchived into the same location. > > In 3.3, the front-ends have been separated in a much cleaner way but > that has also confused me - would the core driver know how to invoke > the Java front-end if you (Danny) don't compile with "java" in your > "--enable-languages"? > > The "default_compilers" array in "gcc/gcc.c" would seem to imply that > this is not an issue, but "gcc/java/lang-specs.h" and the "gcc/configure.in" > script's handling of "--enable-languages" muddle this up (for me). > > So Danny, do you plan to build all the front-ends (and libraries) together > in one jumbo build? Yes. Even if I am not the person uploading the java frontends and libs, at least the gcc driver will be built the same way as yours. (If you take the patches I linked to in the previous > message, this should be painless, except for the extra build time.) Building is relatively painless. I just go away and kick some sheep for awhile (just kidding, I talk nicely to sheep--"grow, you stupid buggers, grow"--I kick the dog instead) Uploading to sourceforge is painful because it costs me money. > > Or do you want us (Mohan and I) to separately build the "gcj3.3" files > and upload "diff"-ed files as in 3.2? Will it work as well as in 3.2 then? > You two would be more aware of any packaging mishaps than I would. Don't know how it will work until we try. But as I said I'm short of time. As I reread this message, I realize that I haven't been very definite about anything. Maybe after a couple nights sleep I'll be right. Danny > Ranjit. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Go where the action is. Get MTV Citibank card. > http://server1.msn.co.in/msnleads/citibankcards/mtv.asp It's cool! > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore. > If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your application fit in a > relational database is painful, don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. > Now part of Progress Software. http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2003-05-20 04:39:46
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ranjit Mathew" <rm...@ho...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Saturday, 17 May 2003 19:40 Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] 3.3 patches > >It's me and it's patches again :-) > > I need them too! :-) > > BTW, just before (2003-05-01) the 3.3 release a patch was > checked in that broke the otherwise clean GCC compile for MinGW > out-of-the-box. :-( > > It's the definition of showmanyc_helper( ) in > "libstdc++-v3/config/io/basic_file_stdio.cc" that assumes > that ioctl( ) would be there if FIONREAD is defined (perhaps > not unreasonably). For the moment, I have bypassed it > by adding an extra "&& defined _GLIBCPP_HAVE_SYS_IOCTL_H", but > is there a better way Danny? > There is no problem for native. FIONREAD is defined for mingw only if you include winsock[2].h. Why would you include winsock when building libstd++? Ahh, is is gthr-win32.h being included? Danny Danny Danny > Ranjit. > > -- > Ranjit Mathew Email: rmathew AT hotmail DOT com > Bangalore, > INDIA. Web: http://ranjitmathew.tripod.com/ > > _________________________________________________________________ > Narain Karthikeyan. The fastest Indian. > http://server1.msn.co.in/msnspecials/narain/index.asp Know more about him. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: If flattening out C++ or Java > code to make your application fit in a relational database is painful, > don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. Now part of Progress Software. > http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |