which gnu-cobol version for which purpose?

Anonymous
2014-07-14
2014-07-22

  • Anonymous
    2014-07-14

    hello guys i am currently confused with the different kind of Versions

    there is fileiorewrite; gnu-cobol-1.x; gnu-cobol-2.0; gnu-cobol-cpp; reportwriter
    i understand reportwriter - with report included; 11 failed tests in make check for me by the way; - gnu-cobol-cpp; which is of course the cpp version;

    but where are the differences between gnu-cobol-1.x and gnu-cobol-2.0 as both seem to get updates?
    and what exactly is fileiorewrite for?

    thank you for clearing those things up
    so long
    Michael

     
    • Brian Tiffin
      Brian Tiffin
      2014-07-16

      To anyone reading along:

      There has been an update to http://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/wiki/Home/

      If these explanations still leave room for confusion, please drop a note.

      Or, better yet, request contributor permissions and then make edits. ;-)

      Cheers,
      Brian

       
      Last edit: Brian Tiffin 2014-07-16
      • Simon Sobisch
        Simon Sobisch
        2014-07-16

        I don't do that often but +1/like. Nice edits!

        Simon

         
      • Hi;

        as per wiki:

        Deciding on a version? ALL of these branches (except for 1.1x) is a
        working branch of GNU Cobol. They all pass the integrity checks and the
        NIST COBOL 85 validation suite. /Usually/; works in progress being works
        in progress, and there may be commits that don't work out, /usually/,
        fixed quickly.

        • For stability: GNU Cobol 1.1 has the longest soak time, most bugs
          are known bugs.
        • For new features: GNU Cobol 2.0 has Roger's lastest, passes tests,
          not all bugs known.
        • For newer features: Ron's Report Writer module is where to be, 2.0
          plus Report Writer.

        Might want to mention that it is marked as v2.1

        Vince

        On 16/07/14 04:38, Brian Tiffin wrote:

        To anyone reading along:

        There has been an update to
        http://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/wiki/Home/
        http://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/wiki/Home

        If these explanations still leave room for confusion, please drop a note.

        Or, request contributor permissions and then make edits. ;-)

        Cheers,
        Brian


         
        Attachments
      • Brian
        Brian
        2014-07-16

        well done +1

         
  • Simon Sobisch
    Simon Sobisch
    2014-07-14

    Hi Michael,

    the version stuff should clear up when 2.0rc is out (at least a little bit). Ignore the working branches if you don't want a specific item in it. I've stopped to merge all changes back and forth (did so in the beginning).

    report-writer is a working branch of Ron Norman for RW. This is currently reviewed and will be merged into either 2.0 (if we delay it) or 2.1.

    fileiorewrite is a working branch of Joe Robins for merging his work documented in http://www.bawtry.net/image/bawtry/OpenCOBOL-fileio/OpenCOBOL-fileio.html into GNU Cobol 2.0. This will be included step by step (SPLIT-KEY support will likely be in 2.0 or 2.1 if it takes too long to review) the other stuff will likely go into 2.1.

    Currently 1.x is more a working branch for cobcrun improvements from Brian (as 2.0 did not have all features 1.1 had when 2.0 started; the changes needed are now merged/rewritten for 2.0). The cobcrun changes are likely to be included into 2.0 when the work is finished soon.

    The next release (starting with a release candidate) will be 2.0 (currently a branch, too, which will be taken to trunk which itself is currently identical to 1.1 release tag before).

    CPP branch is more-or-less the CPP equivalent of 2.0 branch and will only get all the 2.0 changes that will be part of 2.0 release if someone sees the need and does so (@anyone: feel free to volunteer [we will help] or get someone paid for this work if you want it get done).

    @Brian: you may want to review the wiki entry to update it.
    @all: 2.0rc was planned to be published in July but it seems that there will be a delay (I need to do more of the paid work done before...)

    Simon

     
    • Regarding the RW branch, I sent in a bug report (85?) for v2.1 RW
      regarding make check (likewise make test) that shows 11 failures
      relating to RW tests.

      Needless to say current revs. cannot be used as whst is wrong is not known.

      Vince

      On 14/07/14 19:52, Simon Sobisch wrote:

      Hi Michael,

      the version stuff should clear up when 2.0rc is out (at least a little
      bit). Ignore the working branches if you don't want a specific item in
      it. I've stopped to merge all changes back and forth (did so in the
      beginning).

      report-writer is a working branch of Ron Norman for RW. This is
      currently reviewed and will be merged into either 2.0 (if we delay it)
      or 2.1.

      fileiorewrite is a working branch of Joe Robins for merging his work
      documented in
      http://www.bawtry.net/image/bawtry/OpenCOBOL-fileio/OpenCOBOL-fileio.html
      into GNU Cobol 2.0. This will be included step by step (SPLIT-KEY
      support will likely be in 2.0 or 2.1 if it takes too long to review)
      the other stuff will likely go into 2.1.

      Currently 1.x is more a working branch for cobcrun improvements from
      Brian (as 2.0 did not have all features 1.1 had when 2.0 started; the
      changes needed are now merged/rewritten for 2.0). The cobcrun changes
      are likely to be included into 2.0 when the work is finished soon.

      The next release (starting with a release candidate) will be 2.0
      (currently a branch, too, which will be taken to trunk which itself is
      currently identical to 1.1 release tag before).

      CPP branch is more-or-less the CPP equivalent of 2.0 branch and will
      only get all the 2.0 changes that will be part of 2.0 release if
      /someone/ sees the need and does so (@anyone: feel free to volunteer
      [we will help] or get /someone/ paid for this work if you want it get
      done).

      @Brian: you may want to review the wiki entry to update it.
      @all: 2.0rc was planned to be published in July but it seems that
      there will be a delay (I need to do more of the paid work done before...)

      Simon


      which gnu-cobol version for which purpose?
      https://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/discussion/help/thread/4a41c2c1/?limit=25#3bae


       
      Attachments
      • Brian Tiffin
        Brian Tiffin
        2014-07-15

        line spacing doesn't match the test case expectations. Will make correcting this a priority.

        And for anyone reading along.... ALL the versions are "good versions", in that they are working versions. As Simon suggested, I'll try and explain it better on the wiki pages.

        Cheers,
        Brian

         
        • Hmm, well current v2.1 RW not really, fails make check (& test).

          .. but you know that :)

          Another issue updates to the code are still not having the details added
          to the various Changelog files.

          V.

          On 15/07/14 16:39, Brian Tiffin wrote:

          line spacing doesn't match the test case expectations. Will make
          correcting this a priority.

          And for anyone reading along.... ALL the versions are "good versions",
          in that they are working versions. As Simon suggested, I'll try and
          explain it better on the wiki pages.

          Cheers,
          Brian


          which gnu-cobol version for which purpose?
          https://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/discussion/help/thread/4a41c2c1/?limit=25#3bae/a4e9/a2bc


          Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in
          https://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/discussion/help/
          https://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/discussion/help

          To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit
          https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/
          https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions

          --
          IMPORTANT -- This email and the information in it may be confidential, legally privileged and/or protected by law. It is intended solely for the use of the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Please also delete all copies of this email and any attachments from your system.

          If this is an encrypted email it is your responsibility to maintain the 1024 byte key system even for one-use keys. Once mail has been sent the sending key is not kept and therefore a replacement mail cannot be resent.

          We cannot guarantee the security or confidentiality of non encrypted email communications. We do not accept any liability for losses or damages that you may suffer as a result of your receipt of this email including but not limited to computer service or system failure, access delays or interruption, data non-delivery or mis-delivery, computer viruses or other harmful components.

          Copyright in this email and any attachments belongs to Applewood Computers. Should you communicate with anyone at Applewood Computers by email, you consent to us monitoring and reading any such correspondence.

          Nothing in this email shall be taken or read as suggesting, proposing or relating to any agreement concerted practice or other practice that could infringe UK or EC competition legislation (unless it is against Security requirements).

          This Email and its attachments (if any) are scanned for virii using Clamd and ClamAV v0.97.8/18081 (Linux x64).

          Dykegrove Limited T/A Applewood Computers is a company registered in England (number 01681349) whose registered office is at Applewood House, Epping Road, Roydon, Essex, CM19 5DA

           
          Attachments
          • Brian Tiffin
            Brian Tiffin
            2014-07-16

            Again, won't know until digging in deeper, but from what I can tell, the RW 2.1 failures are due to the expectation strings in the text suite sources having extra/missing newlines, not the report engine being wrong. But, I could be wrong. Have to count, and haven't yet. ;-)

            Cheers,
            Brian

            Edit: Started counting. Didn't get past one. This is automake, autoreconf, ./configure voodoo. Yayys. Looking. Crossed eyes in dotted tees.

            More edits; I thought it was autotools, and there is a little bit of voodoo, but not much

            Ron does some good testing, and the strings in the testsuite are coupled with line numbers in the source file. (To catch expected error and warning messages) Tricky to keep in synch. The engine is working the tests are not.

            (And the voodoo is forcing a bootstrap build of tests/testsuite after an svn up)

            For instance

            425. run_reportwriter.at:465: testing Customer Report ...
            ./run_reportwriter.at:640: $COMPILE -std=mf -Wall prog.cob
            --- -   2014-07-17 01:11:37.581737299 -0400
            +++ /home/btiffin/wip/builds/branches/reportwriter/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/425/stderr     2014-07-17 01:11:37.579701244 -0400
            @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
            -prog.cob: 25: Warning: LABEL RECORDS is obsolete in Micro Focus COBOL
            -prog.cob: 27: Warning: RECORD clause ignored for LINE SEQUENTIAL
            -prog.cob: 28: Warning: DATA RECORDS is obsolete in Micro Focus COBOL
            -prog.cob: 44: Warning: LABEL RECORDS is obsolete in Micro Focus COBOL
            +prog.cob: 26: Warning: LABEL RECORDS is obsolete in Micro Focus COBOL
            +prog.cob: 28: Warning: RECORD clause ignored for LINE SEQUENTIAL
            +prog.cob: 29: Warning: DATA RECORDS is obsolete in Micro Focus COBOL
            +prog.cob: 45: Warning: LABEL RECORDS is obsolete in Micro Focus COBOL
            
            425. run_reportwriter.at:465: 425. Customer Report (run_reportwriter.at:465): FAILED (run_reportwriter.at:640)
            

            The testing prog.cob has an extra newline at the top, to get around a macro issue (not being able to force the ID to column 8). Where the test wanted to find a LABEL RECORD warning at prog.cob: 25 it was actually prog.cob: 26

            Same for lines 27 being 28, 28 to 29 and 44 to 45. These are test script failures, not test failures.

            It's hard to avoid the hard coding of line numbers in autotest scripts that are testing for error messages. This will happen again, someday.

            Patch set should be in soon. Even with the current make check failures, if you are in need today, reportwriter is safe to sudo make install.

            Cheers,
            Brian

             
            Last edit: Brian Tiffin 2014-07-17

    • Anonymous
      2014-07-15

      this has been the information i seeked
      muchas gracias
      Michael

       
  • Brian
    Brian
    2014-07-15

    @ Vincent: I noticed those 11 errors too
    @ Simon: thanks for sharing that information to everyone. Didn't know about everything either.
    can't wait to see 2.0rc released!

     
    Last edit: Brian 2014-07-15
    • Brian Tiffin
      Brian Tiffin
      2014-07-22

      Checkin 343 [r343] has what should be the fix for make check in the reportwriter branch. One note; intrepid explorers may need to

      rm tests/testsuite
      

      (not the dir, the amalgam test file, built by autom4te) before

      make check
      

      I've left the bug report [bugs:#85] marked as pending, until someone else tests out the test expectation patches.

      Cheers,
      Brian

       

      Related

      Bugs: #85
      Commit: [r343]


      Last edit: Brian Tiffin 2014-07-22
      • Hi;

        Even with that 'rm', make test does not build the RW proc nor test it so
        the summary test also fails

        Vince

        On 22/07/14 19:46, Brian Tiffin wrote:

        Checkin 343 [r343] http://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/code/343 has
        what should be the fix for make check in the reportwriter branch. One
        note; intrepid explorers may need to rm tests/testsuite (/not the dir,
        the amalgam test file, built by autom4te/) before /make check/.

        Cheers,
        Brian


        which gnu-cobol version for which purpose?
        https://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/discussion/help/thread/4a41c2c1/?limit=25#f714/8aed


        Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in
        https://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/discussion/help/
        https://sourceforge.net/p/open-cobol/discussion/help

        To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit
        https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/
        https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions

        --
        IMPORTANT – This email and the information in it may be confidential, legally privileged and/or protected by law. It is intended solely for the use of the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Please also delete all copies of this email and any attachments from your system.

        If this is an encrypted email it is your responsibility to maintain the 1024 byte key system even for one-use keys. Once mail has been sent the sending key is not kept and therefore a replacement mail cannot be resent.

        We cannot guarantee the security or confidentiality of non encrypted email communications. We do not accept any liability for losses or damages that you may suffer as a result of your receipt of this email including but not limited to computer service or system failure, access delays or interruption, data non-delivery or mis-delivery, computer viruses or other harmful components.

        Copyright in this email and any attachments belongs to Applewood Computers. Should you communicate with anyone at Applewood Computers by email, you consent to us monitoring and reading any such correspondence.

        Nothing in this email shall be taken or read as suggesting, proposing or relating to any agreement concerted practice or other practice that could infringe UK or EC competition legislation (unless it is against Security requirements).

        This Email and its attachments (if any) are scanned for virii using Clamd and ClamAV v0.97.8/18081 (Linux x64).

        Dykegrove Limited T/A Applewood Computers is a company registered in England (number 01681349) whose registered office is at Applewood House, Epping Road, Roydon, Essex, CM19 5DA

         

        Related

        Commit: [r343]

        • Brian Tiffin
          Brian Tiffin
          2014-07-22

          Thanks, Vince.

          I'll poke around with Makefile.am and the rules to get a proper rebuild.

          Cheers,
          Brian

          edit: Checkin 344 [r344] should fix the cobol85/ make test

           

          Related

          Commit: [r344]


          Last edit: Brian Tiffin 2014-07-22


Anonymous


Cancel   Add attachments