From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2002-08-30 08:09:52
Attachments:
gcc-3.3-20020830.diff.gz
|
Jerry I haven't sorted the ChangeLog yet. Basically same as 3.2. Danny |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-08-31 01:00:19
|
Danny Smith writes: > I haven't sorted the ChangeLog yet. Basically same as 3.2. Alas, I cannot process your diffs. MKS patch skips the whole file and GNU patch (2.5) mumbles something about missing headers for unified patches. -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2002-08-31 02:00:51
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry van Dijk" <jv...@at...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Saturday, 31 August 2002 00:24 Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] gcc 3.3 diff > > Danny Smith writes: > > > I haven't sorted the ChangeLog yet. Basically same as 3.2. > > Alas, I cannot process your diffs. MKS patch skips the whole file and > GNU patch (2.5) mumbles something about missing headers for unified > patches. > I'm using GNU patch 2.5 and I've just tested like so: cd /gcc/gcc-HEAD patch -p0 --dry-run < /tmp/gcc-3.3-20020830.diff and it told me correctly that all the patches were already applied replacing the --dry-run with -s should do the deed Danny |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-08-31 08:42:19
|
Danny Smith writes: > I'm using GNU patch 2.5 and I've just tested like so: > > cd /gcc/gcc-HEAD > patch -p0 --dry-run < /tmp/gcc-3.3-20020830.diff > > and it told me correctly that all the patches were already applied > > replacing the --dry-run with -s should do the deed That's what I do, but what I get is: can't find file to patch at input line 8 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- |Index: gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c |=================================================================== |RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c,v |retrieving revision 1.63 |diff -u -p -r1.63 cfgcleanup.c |--- gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c 5 Aug 2002 18:46:32 -0000 1.63 |+++ gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c 30 Aug 2002 04:42:29 -0000 -------------------------- File to patch: Skip this patch? [y] Skipping patch. 1 out of 1 hunk ignored can't find file to patch at input line 63 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- | @@ try_crossjump_to_edge (mode, e1, e2) | | if (GET_CODE (newpos1) == NOTE) | newpos1 = NEXT_INSN (newpos1); |- last = src1->end; | |- /* Emit the jump insn. */ |- label = block_label (redirect_to); |- emit_jump_insn_after (gen_jump (label), src1->end); |- JUMP_LABEL (src1->end) = label; |- LABEL_NUSES (label)++; |- |- /* Delete the now unreachable instructions. */ |- delete_insn_chain (newpos1, last); |- |- /* Make sure there is a barrier after the new jump. */ |- last = next_nonnote_insn (src1->end); |- if (!last || GET_CODE (last) != BARRIER) |- emit_barrier_after (src1->end); |- |- /* Update CFG. */ |- while (src1->succ) |- remove_edge (src1->succ); |- make_single_succ_edge (src1, redirect_to, 0); |+ redirect_from = split_block (src1, PREV_INSN (newpos1))->src; |+ to_remove = redirect_from->succ->dest; | |- update_forwarder_flag (src1); |+ redirect_edge_and_branch_force (redirect_from->succ, redirect_to); |+ flow_delete_block (to_remove); |+ |+ update_forwarder_flag (redirect_from); | | return true; | } |Index: gcc/gcc/config.gcc |=================================================================== |RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/config.gcc,v |retrieving revision 1.242 |diff -u -p -r1.242 config.gcc |--- gcc/gcc/config.gcc 28 Aug 2002 05:23:42 -0000 1.242 |+++ gcc/gcc/config.gcc 30 Aug 2002 04:42:34 -0000 -------------------------- File to patch: Skip this patch? [y] Skipping patch. 1 out of 1 hunk ignored missing header for unified diff at line 79 of patch can't find file to patch at input line 79 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- |file=i386/xm-mingw32.h | tmake_file="i386/t-cygwin i386/t-mingw32" | extra_objs=winnt.o |+ extra_parts="crtbegin.o crtend.o" |+ target_cpu_default=TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT_pentiumpro | if test x$enable_threads = xyes; then | thread_file='win32' | fi -------------------------- File to patch: Skip this patch? [y] Skipping patch. 1 out of 1 hunk ignored can't find file to patch at input line 95 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- |tstuff.c |=================================================================== |RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/crtstuff.c,v |retrieving revision 1.56 |diff -u -p -r1.56 crtstuff.c |--- gcc/gcc/crtstuff.c 4 Jun 2002 02:55:28 -0000 1.56 |+++ gcc/gcc/crtstuff.c 30 Aug 2002 04:42:36 -0000 -------------------------- File to patch: Skip this patch? [y] Skipping patch. 1 out of 1 hunk ignored missing header for unified diff at line 114 of patch can't find file to patch at input line 114 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- |@@ __do_global_ctors (void) | #error "One of CRT_BEGIN or CRT_END must be defined." | #endif | |-#else /* OBJECT_FORMAT_MACHO */ |+#elif defined OBJECT_FORMAT_MACHO | | /* For Mach-O format executables, we assume that the system's runtime is | smart enough to handle constructors and destructors, but doesn't have -------------------------- File to patch: Skip this patch? [y] Skipping patch. patch: **** malformed patch at line 119: GW32__ || __CYGWIN__ */ -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-08-31 16:10:03
|
Danny Smith writes: > I'm using GNU patch 2.5 and I've just tested like so: I edited the diff file, removing all header stuff, and then it works. Five files failed. Four of them I could do by hand. The last one (gcc/gcc/config/i386/winnt.c) failed on three hunks that were to complicated to figure out by hand. I am now building GNAT without them. I think all these problems will go away if you make a normal patch (without the GNU specific unified stuff). -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2002-08-31 10:00:53
Attachments:
gcc-3.3-20020830.diff.bz2
|
Jerry It looks like the text in the diff file got garbled - maybe by gzip? What shell are you using? Okay here it is again, same file, decompressed then recompressed using bz2. I 've uncompressed the bz2 file and did the same --dry run with same result.so I can't really think of what is wrong at my end. Danny |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-08-31 10:54:18
Attachments:
gcc-3.3-20020830.diff
|
Danny Smith writes: > It looks like the text in the diff file got garbled - maybe by gzip? Must be something like that. It's weird, never had such a problem before. All other possibilities (like timezone, path) seem unlikely. > What shell are you using? bash 2.03 for mingw, the MKS kornshell otherwise > Okay here it is again, same file, decompressed then recompressed using > bz2. With the same result. I'm attaching the file I got from you. |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-09-02 18:00:13
|
I changed my build scripts to build a minimal C/Ada compiler in a seperate subdir, and this is working _MUCH_ better. In fact it's now running the testsuite! That is going to take a couple of hours, so more later... A happy jerry... -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-09-02 18:02:02
|
Maybe it is intentional, or maybe it is because I missed a few patches, but when I use my C-only compiler like: gcc -c OOPS.C, it tells me the C++ compiler is not installed. -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-09-01 00:18:57
|
What mail client are you using? .bz2 extension isn't typed correctly by Netscape mail. Name: gcc-3.3-20020830.diff.bz2 Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream) Encoding: base64 Earnie. Jerry van Dijk wrote: > Danny Smith writes: > > > It looks like the text in the diff file got garbled - maybe by gzip? > > Must be something like that. It's weird, never had such a problem before. > All other possibilities (like timezone, path) seem unlikely. > > > What shell are you using? > > bash 2.03 for mingw, the MKS kornshell otherwise > > > Okay here it is again, same file, decompressed then recompressed using > > bz2. > > With the same result. I'm attaching the file I got from you. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: gcc-3.3-20020830.diff > gcc-3.3-20020830.diff Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream) > Encoding: base64 > Description: gcc-3.3-20020830.diff > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > can't find file to patch at input line 8 > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |Index: gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c,v > |retrieving revision 1.63 > |diff -u -p -r1.63 cfgcleanup.c > |--- gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c 5 Aug 2002 18:46:32 -0000 1.63 > |+++ gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c 30 Aug 2002 04:42:29 -0000 > -------------------------- > File to patch: > Skip this patch? [y] > Skipping patch. > 1 out of 1 hunk ignored > can't find file to patch at input line 63 > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > | @@ try_crossjump_to_edge (mode, e1, e2) > | > | if (GET_CODE (newpos1) == NOTE) > | newpos1 = NEXT_INSN (newpos1); > |- last = src1->end; > | > |- /* Emit the jump insn. */ > |- label = block_label (redirect_to); > |- emit_jump_insn_after (gen_jump (label), src1->end); > |- JUMP_LABEL (src1->end) = label; > |- LABEL_NUSES (label)++; > |- > |- /* Delete the now unreachable instructions. */ > |- delete_insn_chain (newpos1, last); > |- > |- /* Make sure there is a barrier after the new jump. */ > |- last = next_nonnote_insn (src1->end); > |- if (!last || GET_CODE (last) != BARRIER) > |- emit_barrier_after (src1->end); > |- > |- /* Update CFG. */ > |- while (src1->succ) > |- remove_edge (src1->succ); > |- make_single_succ_edge (src1, redirect_to, 0); > |+ redirect_from = split_block (src1, PREV_INSN (newpos1))->src; > |+ to_remove = redirect_from->succ->dest; > | > |- update_forwarder_flag (src1); > |+ redirect_edge_and_branch_force (redirect_from->succ, redirect_to); > |+ flow_delete_block (to_remove); > |+ > |+ update_forwarder_flag (redirect_from); > | > | return true; > | } > |Index: gcc/gcc/config.gcc > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/config.gcc,v > |retrieving revision 1.242 > |diff -u -p -r1.242 config.gcc > |--- gcc/gcc/config.gcc 28 Aug 2002 05:23:42 -0000 1.242 > |+++ gcc/gcc/config.gcc 30 Aug 2002 04:42:34 -0000 > -------------------------- > File to patch: > Skip this patch? [y] > Skipping patch. > 1 out of 1 hunk ignored > missing header for unified diff at line 79 of patch > can't find file to patch at input line 79 > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |file=i386/xm-mingw32.h > | tmake_file="i386/t-cygwin i386/t-mingw32" > | extra_objs=winnt.o > |+ extra_parts="crtbegin.o crtend.o" > |+ target_cpu_default=TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT_pentiumpro > | if test x$enable_threads = xyes; then > | thread_file='win32' > | fi > -------------------------- > File to patch: > Skip this patch? [y] > Skipping patch. > 1 out of 1 hunk ignored > can't find file to patch at input line 95 > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |tstuff.c > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/crtstuff.c,v > |retrieving revision 1.56 > |diff -u -p -r1.56 crtstuff.c > |--- gcc/gcc/crtstuff.c 4 Jun 2002 02:55:28 -0000 1.56 > |+++ gcc/gcc/crtstuff.c 30 Aug 2002 04:42:36 -0000 > -------------------------- > File to patch: > Skip this patch? [y] > Skipping patch. > 1 out of 1 hunk ignored > missing header for unified diff at line 114 of patch > can't find file to patch at input line 114 > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |@@ __do_global_ctors (void) > | #error "One of CRT_BEGIN or CRT_END must be defined." > | #endif > | > |-#else /* OBJECT_FORMAT_MACHO */ > |+#elif defined OBJECT_FORMAT_MACHO > | > | /* For Mach-O format executables, we assume that the system's runtime is > | smart enough to handle constructors and destructors, but doesn't have > -------------------------- > File to patch: > Skip this patch? [y] > Skipping patch. > patch: **** malformed patch at line 119: GW32__ || __CYGWIN__ */ > > -- > -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... > -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-09-01 12:06:41
|
Earnie Boyd writes: > What mail client are you using? .bz2 extension isn't typed correctly by > Netscape > mail. > > Name: gcc-3.3-20020830.diff.bz2 > Type: unspecified type > (application/octet-stream) > Encoding: base64 VM 7.1 under emacs 21.1. I have used VM for years without problems, but this might of course be a bug in this version. I'll check. (I use VM as it much more comfortable to use then RMAIL. Advantages of an emacs base email client are of course the integration into the development environment, portability to other environments and of no virsusses :-) -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-09-02 19:02:49
|
The capital C indicates a c++ source. You could use `gcc -x c -c OOPS.C' or `gcc -c OOPS.c'. Earnie. Jerry van Dijk wrote: > Maybe it is intentional, or maybe it is because I missed a few patches, but > when I use my C-only compiler like: gcc -c OOPS.C, it tells me the C++ > compiler is not installed. > > -- > -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... > -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-09-02 22:23:12
|
Earnie Boyd writes: > The capital C indicates a c++ source. You could use `gcc -x c -c OOPS.C' or > `gcc -c OOPS.c'. Yes, I know. The question is: since FAT and NTFS are not case sensitive, is this the correct behaviour. -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2002-09-02 21:12:43
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry van Dijk" <jv...@at...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Monday, 2 September 2002 18:59 Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] gnat 3.3 SUCCES !!! > > I changed my build scripts to build a minimal C/Ada compiler in a seperate > subdir, and this is working _MUCH_ better. In fact it's now running the > testsuite! That is going to take a couple of hours, so more later... > > A happy jerry... > That is good news. If you have time, could you post a simple testcase that fails when Gnat is built as part of an integrated C/C++/ObjC/Fortran/Ada compiler package and succeeds with C/Ada-only compiler package? Or do I misinterpret your message? One problem that I noticed earlier is that Gnat generates a main() using K&R style (in bindgen.adb. IIRC). This fails when mixing C++ and Ada. I ran into this with the ex6_main example in the the Examples directory of GNAT Version 3.13p from ACT, Danny |
From: Jerry v. D. <jv...@at...> - 2002-09-02 22:36:47
|
Danny Smith writes: > That is good news. If you have time, could you post a simple testcase > that fails when Gnat is built as part of an integrated > C/C++/ObjC/Fortran/Ada compiler package and succeeds with C/Ada-only > compiler package? Or do I misinterpret your message? No, that's correct. When I've finished the first testrun (usually takes between 6/8 hours because the tasking tests take a lot of time) I'll do a normal build again and try to compare them. > One problem that I noticed earlier is that Gnat generates a main() > using K&R style (in bindgen.adb. IIRC). This fails when mixing C++ and > Ada. I ran into this with the ex6_main example in the the Examples > directory of GNAT Version 3.13p from ACT, Yes, C++ support in 3.13 was not very good, 3.14 is much better (3.13 had a lot of problems with virtual constructors). I have also rewritten the examples for 3.15. 3.13p is really ancient. Use 3.14 at minimum (gcc 3.3 == gnat 5.0 == gnat 3.16 wavefront, using the 3.15a1 library). Note that from 3.14 onwards the main program is in Ada and no longer in C. (Althoug it is still an option to generate the binder file in C) -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jv...@at... -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk |
From: <ch...@it...> - 2002-09-07 16:24:15
|
Hi all. I have prepared a Windows DDK for a beta release. You can download it here: http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1.tar.gz (binaries) http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1-src.tar.gz (sources) A small sample driver is available here: http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-sample.tar.gz Is there any chance of this beeing part of the winsup CVS Repository like w32api is? Casper Hornstrup |
From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-09-07 17:01:30
|
ch...@it... wrote: > > Hi all. > > I have prepared a Windows DDK for a beta release. > You can download it here: > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1.tar.gz (binaries) > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1-src.tar.gz (sources) > > A small sample driver is available here: > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-sample.tar.gz > > Is there any chance of this beeing part of the winsup CVS > Repository like w32api is? > Give me some time to take a look. I've already an empty winsup/w32sdk directory in CVS would that work? If not, I think we could change it. Earnie. |
From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-09-20 12:23:44
|
Ok, I've reviewed this. Should we make this a part of w32api under a ddk directory? Or, should we treat it as a separate package? I'm in favor of include/ddk and lib/ddk under the existing w32api package. Earnie. ch...@it... wrote: > > Hi all. > > I have prepared a Windows DDK for a beta release. > You can download it here: > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1.tar.gz (binaries) > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1-src.tar.gz (sources) > > A small sample driver is available here: > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-sample.tar.gz > > Is there any chance of this beeing part of the winsup CVS > Repository like w32api is? > > Casper Hornstrup > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |
From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-09-25 13:37:13
|
So, the plan will be to create the ddk under the existing w32api. Earnie. Earnie Boyd wrote: > > Ok, I've reviewed this. Should we make this a part of w32api under a > ddk directory? Or, should we treat it as a separate package? I'm in > favor of include/ddk and lib/ddk under the existing w32api package. > > Earnie. > > ch...@it... wrote: > > > > Hi all. > > > > I have prepared a Windows DDK for a beta release. > > You can download it here: > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1.tar.gz (binaries) > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1-src.tar.gz (sources) > > > > A small sample driver is available here: > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-sample.tar.gz > > > > Is there any chance of this beeing part of the winsup CVS > > Repository like w32api is? > > > > Casper Hornstrup > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > > _______________________________________________ > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > Min...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |
From: <ch...@it...> - 2002-09-25 20:15:36
|
Sorry, I missed your last mail. I'm fine with this beeing part of w32api. It depends on w32api anyway. Include files will still be installed to include/ddk right? > -----Original Message----- > From: min...@li... > [mailto:min...@li...] On Behalf Of > Earnie Boyd > Sent: 25. september 2002 15:38 > To: min...@li... > Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > > > So, the plan will be to create the ddk under the existing w32api. > > Earnie. > > Earnie Boyd wrote: > > > > Ok, I've reviewed this. Should we make this a part of > w32api under a > > ddk directory? Or, should we treat it as a separate > package? I'm in > > favor of include/ddk and lib/ddk under the existing w32api package. > > > > Earnie. > > > > ch...@it... wrote: > > > > > > Hi all. > > > > > > I have prepared a Windows DDK for a beta release. > > > You can download it here: > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1.tar.gz (binaries) > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1-src.tar.gz (sources) > > > > > > A small sample driver is available here: > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-sample.tar.gz > > > > > > Is there any chance of this beeing part of the winsup CVS > Repository > > > like w32api is? > > > > > > Casper Hornstrup > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > > > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > > > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > > Min...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > _______________________________________________ > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > Min...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/m> ingw-dvlpr > |
From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-09-25 21:30:21
|
ch...@it... wrote: > > Sorry, I missed your last mail. I'm fine with this beeing part of > w32api. > It depends on w32api anyway. Include files will still be installed to > include/ddk right? > Right. Earnie. |
From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-10-05 10:19:42
|
Casper, I'm getting syntax errors from dlltool with constructs of @foo@4 in hal.def, ntoskrnl.def and videoprt.def. I've commented them out for now. I'll be uploading to CVS later this weekend. Earnie. ch...@it... wrote: > > Sorry, I missed your last mail. I'm fine with this beeing part of > w32api. > It depends on w32api anyway. Include files will still be installed to > include/ddk right? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: min...@li... > > [mailto:min...@li...] On Behalf Of > > Earnie Boyd > > Sent: 25. september 2002 15:38 > > To: min...@li... > > Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > > > > > > So, the plan will be to create the ddk under the existing w32api. > > > > Earnie. > > > > Earnie Boyd wrote: > > > > > > Ok, I've reviewed this. Should we make this a part of > > w32api under a > > > ddk directory? Or, should we treat it as a separate > > package? I'm in > > > favor of include/ddk and lib/ddk under the existing w32api package. > > > > > > Earnie. > > > > > > ch...@it... wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi all. > > > > > > > > I have prepared a Windows DDK for a beta release. > > > > You can download it here: > > > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1.tar.gz (binaries) > > > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1-src.tar.gz (sources) > > > > > > > > A small sample driver is available here: > > > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-sample.tar.gz > > > > > > > > Is there any chance of this beeing part of the winsup CVS > > Repository > > > > like w32api is? > > > > > > > > Casper Hornstrup > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > > > > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > > > > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > > > Min...@li... > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > > _______________________________________________ > > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > > Min...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > _______________________________________________ > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > Min...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/m> ingw-dvlpr > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |
From: <ch...@it...> - 2002-10-05 15:06:17
|
This is because the fastcall patch is missing in the lastest mingw binutils release. Using an older version of binutils it will work. Casper > -----Original Message----- > From: min...@li... > [mailto:min...@li...] On Behalf Of > Earnie Boyd > Sent: 5. oktober 2002 04:25 > To: min...@li... > Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > > > Casper, > > I'm getting syntax errors from dlltool with constructs of > @foo@4 in hal.def, ntoskrnl.def and videoprt.def. I've > commented them out for now. I'll be uploading to CVS later > this weekend. > > Earnie. > > ch...@it... wrote: > > > > Sorry, I missed your last mail. I'm fine with this beeing part of > > w32api. It depends on w32api anyway. Include files will still be > > installed to include/ddk right? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: min...@li... > > > [mailto:min...@li...] On > Behalf Of Earnie > > > Boyd > > > Sent: 25. september 2002 15:38 > > > To: min...@li... > > > Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > > > > > > > > > So, the plan will be to create the ddk under the existing w32api. > > > > > > Earnie. > > > > > > Earnie Boyd wrote: > > > > > > > > Ok, I've reviewed this. Should we make this a part of > > > w32api under a > > > > ddk directory? Or, should we treat it as a separate > > > package? I'm in > > > > favor of include/ddk and lib/ddk under the existing w32api > > > > package. > > > > > > > > Earnie. > > > > > > > > ch...@it... wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi all. > > > > > > > > > > I have prepared a Windows DDK for a beta release. > > > > > You can download it here: > > > > > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1.tar.gz (binaries) > > > > > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-0.1-src.tar.gz (sources) > > > > > > > > > > A small sample driver is available here: > > > > > > > > > > http://reactos.wox.org/download/ddk-sample.tar.gz > > > > > > > > > > Is there any chance of this beeing part of the winsup CVS > > > Repository > > > > > like w32api is? > > > > > > > > > > Casper Hornstrup > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of > that same old > > > > > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > > > > > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list Min...@li... > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list Min...@li... > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > > _______________________________________________ > > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > > Min...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/m> ingw-dvlpr > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > _______________________________________________ > > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > > Min...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/m> ingw-dvlpr > |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2002-10-05 19:47:57
|
----- Original Message ----- From: <ch...@it...> To: <min...@li...> Sent: Saturday, 5 October 2002 11:49 Subject: RE: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > This is because the fastcall patch is missing in the lastest mingw > binutils release. Using an older version of binutils it will work. My fault. Actually the source does contain the patchset. The problem is that the generated files deflex.c, deflex.h were not regenerated because of timestamp issues. Every time I want to test a non-fastcall patch against binutils (like Luke's rcparse patch or Ralf's auto-import patch to pe-dll.c ) I revert the fastcall patches and make sure i am testing against official CVS. Okay, now when putting the fastcall patchset back in, I forgot to 'touch' the deflex.l amd defparse.y files so that the files generated from them were not updated when I built. Casper could you to try to get these patches into official sources, with some testsuite cases. That would prevent this from happening. In the meantime, I will upload new binaries. Sorry for my mistake. Danny > > Casper > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: min...@li... > > [mailto:min...@li...] On Behalf Of > > Earnie Boyd > > Sent: 5. oktober 2002 04:25 > > To: min...@li... > > Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > > > > > > Casper, > > > > I'm getting syntax errors from dlltool with constructs of > > @foo@4 in hal.def, ntoskrnl.def and videoprt.def. I've > > commented them out for now. I'll be uploading to CVS later > > this weekend. > > > > Earnie. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr |
From: <ch...@it...> - 2002-10-05 23:21:16
|
> -----Original Message----- > From: min...@li... > [mailto:min...@li...] On Behalf Of > Danny Smith > Sent: 5. oktober 2002 21:47 > To: mingw-dvlpr > Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <ch...@it...> > To: <min...@li...> > Sent: Saturday, 5 October 2002 11:49 > Subject: RE: [MinGW-dvlpr] Windows DDK beta release > > > Casper could you to try to get these patches into official > sources, with some testsuite cases. That would prevent this > from happening. > > > Danny Yes. I will try to create some testcases. Could you send me the binutils fastcall patch? Preferably in a standalone version, but if you don't have that, I will seperate it. Casper Hornstrup |