prc-tools-devel — Patches to prc-tools and other prc-tools maintenance discussions

Re: Problem installing prc-tools on MS Windows with Cygwin

[Ton v. O. <to...@v-...>]

On 2/5/14 5:41 AM, F. Townsend, III wrote:
> I see this is a low volume list but I hope someone can help me.
>
> When using the Cygwin installer, I get a persistent
>
> "Unable to get setup.ini from
> <http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/>"
>
> error.
>
> I am able to download setup.ini by pointing a browser at
> http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install. I assumed that I was
> entering the url incorrectly, but after multiple tries, disabling
> firewalls, running as admin, etc., I had no success.
>
>
> I noticed that the install message reported
> "Downloading...setup.ini from
> http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/x86."
>
> Since Cygwin's setup.exe is now (for 1.7.28) either setup-x86.exe
> or setup-x86_64.exe, I thought that the new setup may make
> different assumptions regarding the location of setup.ini.  To
> test this, I found that a legacy version of setup.exe was able to
> download prc-tools correctly.
>
> So it looks to me as if the new Cygwin setup can no longer get
> setup.ini from prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install.
>
> Is this correct?
>
> Can I fix this?
>
> Thanks!
Should work now.
Cygwins setup.ini should now be located in the x86 subdirectory for 32-bit installations
(prc-tools is 32-bit).
Put a redirect on the website so both old and new setup.exe should be able to find setup.ini.
Note you still need the -X command switch, since setup.ini is not signed.
See http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/cygwin.html
The relevant Note says:
------
Note: If you are using setup.exe version 2.573.2.3 (released in August 2008) or later it will not let you
download prc-tools by default because our setup.ini package information file is not signed.
Make a shortcut where you specify the command to run as "setup.exe -X".
The -X option will force setup to skip the verification of the cryptograhic signature of our setup.ini file.
------
But I guess you knew this already.
I did test it and could install prc-tools with the latest setup.

Good luck with prc-tools

Ton van Overbeek

Problem installing prc-tools on MS Windows with Cygwin

[F. T. I. <fto...@ve...>]

I see this is a low volume list but I hope someone can help me.

When using the Cygwin installer, I get a persistent

"Unable to get setup.ini from
<http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/>"

error.

I am able to download setup.ini by pointing a browser at
http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install. I assumed that I was 
entering the url incorrectly, but after multiple tries, disabling 
firewalls, running as admin, etc., I had no success.


I noticed that the install message reported 
"Downloading...setup.ini from 
http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/x86."

Since Cygwin's setup.exe is now (for 1.7.28) either setup-x86.exe 
or setup-x86_64.exe, I thought that the new setup may make 
different assumptions regarding the location of setup.ini.  To 
test this, I found that a legacy version of setup.exe was able to 
download prc-tools correctly.

So it looks to me as if the new Cygwin setup can no longer get 
setup.ini from prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install.

Is this correct?

Can I fix this?

Thanks!

Re: Current Status of the Project

[Aaron A. <mai...@mo...>]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Eric Bresie <eb...@gm...> wrote:
> Hey guys, I am wondering what the current status of the prc-tools project is.

it is in limbo :) prc-tools 2.3 seems to be the last version made.

> Reading some of the older emails, there seemed to be some interest on
> using it on Mac.  There was some discussion of possible roadmaps, but
> beyond that, I have not seen much activity here.

as ton said; google "prc-tools macos" - its been done and has been
widely adopted and is in use more than some people can imagine.

> I know with Palm's expected migration to a Linux based system means
> the shelf life may have decreased even more, but there is still a lot
> of machines out there that need to be supported (Treos, Centro, etc)
> and could benefit from improved compiler tool chain.

improve? how? :)

gcc 2.95 was probably the last version of gcc to play with 68000 code
gcc 3.x is being used right now for arm-palmos-gcc, and everyone knows;
due to the manner in which PceNativeCall works that you can use any
arm-elf compiler that is on the market as you dont link against crt.o etc.

ie: you can use the latest gcc for gameboy dev for palm development :)

> Has any progress been made in porting it to use newer gcc compilers
> (4.3.1 just released)?  Would moving any of this type of conversation
> over to a gcc mailing list be of help?

if someone has an ARM version of it - you can already use it.
it wont make sense for 68000 tho.

> I am still new to Palm development, so I'd also like to understand the
> make up of the project as well.  Is it safe to say you can break the
> projects components down into:

google :)

> - Palm Specific Tools
>   * Building prc, pdb, etc
>   * Resource Tools

this is specific to utilies like pilrc, par, etc. not compiler. these tools are
seperately maintained; but may be included within a prc-tools distro.

> - Compiler Specific Deltas
>   * Compiler
>   * Linker
>   * Bin Tools

this is what prc-tools is.

-- 
// Aaron Ardiri ... the "PilRC" guy :)

Re: Current Status of the Project

[Ton v. O. <to...@v-...>]

Eric Bresie wrote:
> Hey guys, I am wondering what the current status of the prc-tools project is.
>
> Reading some of the older emails, there seemed to be some interest on
> using it on Mac.  There was some discussion of possible roadmaps, but
> beyond that, I have not seen much activity here.
>
>   
Mac OSX version does exist. Just Google for 'prc-tools macos'.
> I know with Palm's expected migration to a Linux based system means
> the shelf life may have decreased even more, but there is still a lot
> of machines out there that need to be supported (Treos, Centro, etc)
> and could benefit from improved compiler tool chain.
>
> Has any progress been made in porting it to use newer gcc compilers
> (4.3.1 just released)?  Would moving any of this type of conversation
> over to a gcc mailing list be of help?
>
>   
No. John Marshall has been the main driver behind prc-tools. I myself 
have been active with the
debugger (gdb) to get it to support multiple 68k code sections.
The main 'problem' is the segmentation model on the 68k side. All data 
is adressed relative to A5
where A5 points to the *end* of the data area. This also makes C++ 
support a pain.
I am no compiler expert, but you would need a good knowledge of gcc 
internals since gcc 2.95
to get a working gcc 4.x compiler for palmos 68k.
Since, for 68k development, the existing one still works quite well 
(some people might disagree)
there has not been much incentive to do further development.
However for the ARM version it should be quite easy to get the ARM 
palmos version up to date.
Many of the more advanced developers use 100% or almost 100% ARM based apps.
However there is no support for the ARM debugger nub at all in 
prc-tools. You can use the
stand-alone PalmOS debugger from PODS for ARM debugging on the device.
> I am still new to Palm development, so I'd also like to understand the
> make up of the project as well.  Is it safe to say you can break the
> projects components down into:
>
> - Palm Specific Tools
>    * Building prc, pdb, etc
>    * Resource Tools
>   
PilRC (separate project, see pilrc.sourceforge.net) for resources, 
buildprc, palmdev-prep, multigen etc.
See CVS tree and http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/doc/prc-tools_6.html
> - Compiler Specific Deltas
>    * Compiler
>    * Linker
>    * Bin Tools
>
> Is this safe to say?
>   
Yes (and do not forget gdb).
> Look forward to hearing from you guys, and hope there is still life here.
>   
Hope this is not too disappointing for you.

Ton van Overbeek

Current Status of the Project

[Eric B. <eb...@gm...>]

Hey guys, I am wondering what the current status of the prc-tools project is.

Reading some of the older emails, there seemed to be some interest on
using it on Mac.  There was some discussion of possible roadmaps, but
beyond that, I have not seen much activity here.

I know with Palm's expected migration to a Linux based system means
the shelf life may have decreased even more, but there is still a lot
of machines out there that need to be supported (Treos, Centro, etc)
and could benefit from improved compiler tool chain.

Has any progress been made in porting it to use newer gcc compilers
(4.3.1 just released)?  Would moving any of this type of conversation
over to a gcc mailing list be of help?

I am still new to Palm development, so I'd also like to understand the
make up of the project as well.  Is it safe to say you can break the
projects components down into:

- Palm Specific Tools
   * Building prc, pdb, etc
   * Resource Tools

- Compiler Specific Deltas
   * Compiler
   * Linker
   * Bin Tools

Is this safe to say?

Look forward to hearing from you guys, and hope there is still life here.
-- 
Eric Bresie
eb...@gm...

Building prc-tools on the mac

[Martin R. <rei...@mi...>]

Hello,

I am trying to build prc-tools on my mac from source.  I followed the
instructions for downloading the tar balls, unpacking, patching, and
configuring, which all seemed to work.  However, when I did make, it made it
part of the way and failed with:

../../../prc-tools-2.3/binutils/gas/config/tc-m68k.h:209: error: array type
has incomplete element type
make[4]: *** [app.o] Error 1
make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2
make[1]: *** [all-gas] Error 2
make: *** [real-binutils] Error 2

Has anyone seen this?  What do I do now?  Thanks,

Martin

Re: Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install thetools

[Ton v. O. <to...@v-...>]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006, Barrie Treloar wrote:

> On 11/11/06, Barrie Treloar <bae...@gm...> wrote:
> > On 11/11/06, to...@v-... <to...@v-...> wrote:
> > > Should work now. There were problems with all project websites on SourceForge this week.
> >
> > Still have same problem.
> > Will try in a day or so.
>
> Still getting same error a week later. I've also emailed the project admin.
> Can anyone think of anything else to do to get this resolved?
> Cheers
>
>
> An error has been encountered in accessing this page.
>
> 1. Server: prc-tools.sourceforge.net
> 2. URL path: /install/setup.bz2
> 3. Error notes: File does not exist:
> /home/groups/p/pr/prc-tools/htdocs/install/setup.bz2
> 4. Error type: 404
> 5. Request method: GET
> 6. Request query string:
> 7. Time: 2006-11-17 14:11:20 PST (1163801480)
>

Should be resolved now.
Problem was caused by the changes in the SourceForge download system.
Made some changes on the SF site and now I can download the prc-tools and
pilrc packages using Cygwin Setup again.
Thanks for being persistent in reporting the problem which forced me to
really looking into it (and finding a solution ;-)).

Ton van Overbeek

Re: Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install thetools

[Barrie T. <bae...@gm...>]

On 11/11/06, Barrie Treloar <bae...@gm...> wrote:
> On 11/11/06, to...@v-... <to...@v-...> wrote:
> > Should work now. There were problems with all project websites on SourceForge this week.
>
> Still have same problem.
> Will try in a day or so.

Still getting same error a week later. I've also emailed the project admin.
Can anyone think of anything else to do to get this resolved?
Cheers


An error has been encountered in accessing this page.

1. Server: prc-tools.sourceforge.net
2. URL path: /install/setup.bz2
3. Error notes: File does not exist:
/home/groups/p/pr/prc-tools/htdocs/install/setup.bz2
4. Error type: 404
5. Request method: GET
6. Request query string:
7. Time: 2006-11-17 14:11:20 PST (1163801480)

Re: Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install thetools

[Barrie T. <bae...@gm...>]

On 11/11/06, to...@v-... <to...@v-...> wrote:
> Should work now. There were problems with all project websites on SourceForge this week.

Still have same problem.
Will try in a day or so.

Re: Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install thetools

[<to...@v-...>]

Should work now. There were problems with all project websites on SourceForge this week.

Re: Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install the tools

[Barrie T. <bae...@gm...>]

I am getting the same error as this email and the bugs
* https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1407829&group_id=4429&atid=104429
* https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1055801&group_id=4429&atid=104429

The log output from setup.exe is:

2006/11/11 06:55:48 Starting cygwin install, version 2.510.2.2
2006/11/11 06:55:48 Current Directory: D:\Downloads\cygwin-install
2006/11/11 06:55:48 Changing gid to Users
2006/11/11 06:55:48 Could not open service McShield for query, start
and stop. McAfee may not be installed, or we don't have access.
2006/11/11 06:55:56 source: download
2006/11/11 06:55:57 Selected local directory: D:\Downloads\cygwin-install
2006/11/11 06:55:58 net: Direct
get_url_to_membuf http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/mirrors.lst
getUrlToStream http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/mirrors.lst
2006/11/11 06:56:02 site: http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install
get_url_to_membuf http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/setup.bz2
getUrlToStream http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/setup.bz2
getUrlToStream failed!
get_url_to_membuf failed!
get_url_to_membuf http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/setup.ini
getUrlToStream http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/setup.ini
100% (1998 of 1998 bytes of ini file read)
get_url_to_file
http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/prc-tools/prc-tools-2.3-cygwin.tar.bz2
D:\Downloads\cygwin-install/http%3a%2f%2fprc-tools.sourceforge.net%2finstall/prc-tools/prc-tools-2.3-cygwin.tar.bz2.tmp
get_url_to_file failed!
2006/11/11 06:56:06 mbox yesno: Download Incomplete.  Try again?
2006/11/11 06:56:08 mbox note: Download Incomplete.  Try again?
2006/11/11 06:56:09 Ending cygwin install


When I manually attempt to connect to the URL
http://prc-tools.sourceforge.net/install/setup.bz2 I get a 404

An error has been encountered in accessing this page.

1. Server: prc-tools.sourceforge.net
2. URL path: /install/setup.bz2
3. Error notes: File does not exist:
/home/groups/p/pr/prc-tools/htdocs/install/setup.bz2
4. Error type: 404
5. Request method: GET
6. Request query string:
7. Time: 2006-11-10 12:27:43 PST (1163190463)

Reporting this problem: The problem you have encountered is with a
project web site hosted by SourceForge.net. This issue should be
reported to the SourceForge.net-hosted project (not to
SourceForge.net).

If this is a severe or recurring/persistent problem, please do one of
the following, and provide the error text (numbered 1 through 7,
above):

   1. Contact the project via their designated support resources.
   2. Contact the project administrators of this project via email
(see the upper right-hand corner of the Project Summary page for their
usernames) at use...@us...

If you are a member of the project that maintains this web content,
please refer to the Site Documentation regarding the project web
service for further assistance.

Can someone fix this please?

Re: undefined reference to vtable

[Ton v. O. <v-o...@ci...>]

On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Wolfgang Spraul wrote:

> Ton van Overbeek -
>
> I am using prc-tools 2.3 (cygwin) together with PEAL
> (www.sealiesoftware.com/peal) to develop PNOs.
> However as soon as I add a class to my ARM .cpp files that has a virtual
> function, I get two errors when linking:
>
> /usr/lib/gcc-lib/arm-palmos/3.3.1/../../../../arm-palmos/bin/ld: section .gnu.linkonce.r._ZTS4test [00000078 -> 0000007f] overlaps section .text [00000000 -> 0000da83]
> Output/arm/test.o(.gnu.linkonce.d._ZTI4test+0x0): undefined reference to `vtable for __cxxabiv1::__class_type_info'
>
> Any idea?
> When I use larger C++ sources, I also get gxx_personality errors and
> other C++ related errors (unwind, etc).
>
> Is there a more recent prc-tools somewhere? Should I not use the Cygwin
> version?
> How about just using any (stock) gcc cross-compiler, compiling ARM on
> x86 and then using the peal postlinker to get it into a resource format
> for Palm OS?
>
> Thanks for any help you might have,
> Wolfgang Spraul

I am afraid I cannot be of much help. I have zero to no experience in
building PNOs. arm-palmos-gcc is basically the normal gcc cross
compiler for ARM. You could try to roll your own arm gcc.

Maybe if you write to Greg Parker (the author of peal) you could get a
better answer. His email for peal matters is gpa...@se... .

Good luck.

Ton van Overbeek

undefined reference to vtable

[Wolfgang S. <ws...@q-...>]

Ton van Overbeek -

I am using prc-tools 2.3 (cygwin) together with PEAL 
(www.sealiesoftware.com/peal) to develop PNOs.
However as soon as I add a class to my ARM .cpp files that has a virtual 
function, I get two errors when linking:

/usr/lib/gcc-lib/arm-palmos/3.3.1/../../../../arm-palmos/bin/ld: section .gnu.linkonce.r._ZTS4test [00000078 -> 0000007f] overlaps section .text [00000000 -> 0000da83]
Output/arm/test.o(.gnu.linkonce.d._ZTI4test+0x0): undefined reference to `vtable for __cxxabiv1::__class_type_info'

Any idea?
When I use larger C++ sources, I also get gxx_personality errors and 
other C++ related errors (unwind, etc).

Is there a more recent prc-tools somewhere? Should I not use the Cygwin 
version?
How about just using any (stock) gcc cross-compiler, compiling ARM on 
x86 and then using the peal postlinker to get it into a resource format 
for Palm OS?

Thanks for any help you might have,
Wolfgang Spraul

Re: Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install the tools

[Ton v. O. <v-o...@ci...>]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Gregg Levine wrote:

> Hello!
> A bit more information.
>
> Yes this is a Cygwin/Windows setup. And setup is the current version
> as delivered by their site, a 2.510.2.2 series one. And Cygwin is
> currently at the 1.5x series.
>
> However the actual error message returned which should have been
> displayed is "C:\DLOAD3/http%3a%2f%2fprc-tools.sourceforge.net%2finstall/prc-tools/prc-tools-2.3-cygwin.tar.bz2
> wrong size (12786 actual vs 4285677 expected)"
>
> However what appears to be the correctly sized package is indeed
> stored on my system.
> --
> Gregg C Levine gre...@gm...
> "This signature was once found posting rude
>  messages in English in the Moscow subway."

Strange. Maybe a problem with permissions on Windows 2000/XP?
An older setup.ini or other file which cannot be overwritten ?
Is setup.ini correctly downloaded to
C:\DLOAD3\http%3a%2f%2fprc-tools.sourceforge.net%2finstall ?
You could also try the download-only option in Cygwins Setup and see if
that works.

Ton van Overbeek

Re: Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install the tools

[Gregg L. <gre...@gm...>]

Hello!
A bit more information.

Yes this is a Cygwin/Windows setup. And setup is the current version
as delivered by their site, a 2.510.2.2 series one. And Cygwin is
currently at the 1.5x series.

However the actual error message returned which should have been
displayed is "C:\DLOAD3/http%3a%2f%2fprc-tools.sourceforge.net%2finstall/pr=
c-tools/prc-tools-2.3-cygwin.tar.bz2
wrong size (12786 actual vs 4285677 expected)"

However what appears to be the correctly sized package is indeed
stored on my system.
--
Gregg C Levine gre...@gm...
"This signature was once found posting rude
 messages in English in the Moscow subway."


On 2/27/06, Gregg Levine <gre...@gm...> wrote:
> Hello!
> I have a problem. One which I can not explain. I am in the process of
> setting up a build environment for my Palm Pilot projects. I chose the
> PRC tools since they seem to be friendlier then the ones from Palm
> itself.
>
> However every time I run the setup program it finds the location for
> the tools properly. However it complains that something caused it to
> become an incomplete download and wants me to try again. So I do.
> Setup then drags its feet and does not do anything. Incidentally this
> is the second time this has happened. This time I decided to join the
> list and mention this here.
> --
> Gregg C Levine gre...@gm...
> "This signature was once found posting rude
>  messages in English in the Moscow subway."
>

(no subject)

[<v-o...@ci...>]

Gregg Levine wrote:
> Hello!
> I have a problem. One which I can not explain. I am in the process of
> setting up a build environment for my Palm Pilot projects. I chose the
> PRC tools since they seem to be friendlier then the ones from Palm
> itself.
>
> However every time I run the setup program it finds the location for
> the tools properly. However it complains that something caused it to
> become an incomplete download and wants me to try again. So I do.
> Setup then drags its feet and does not do anything. Incidentally this
> is the second time this has happened. This time I decided to join the
> list and mention this here.
> --
> Gregg C Levine gre...@gm...
> "This signature was once found posting rude
>  messages in English in the Moscow subway."
>
Need a bit more information. Are we talking about a Windows/Cygwin installation?
What version of Cygwin and Cygwin's Setup program ?
Current versions are 1.5.19 for Cygwin and 2.510.2.2 for Cygwins Setup program.
Cygwins Setup produces log files during its run. Have a look at setup.log.full.
It may give you some more clues about what is going wrong.
I just checked and I can still download all prc-tools packages correctly.

Ton van Overbeek

Problem using the standard Cygwin setup program to install the tools

[Gregg L. <gre...@gm...>]

Hello!
I have a problem. One which I can not explain. I am in the process of
setting up a build environment for my Palm Pilot projects. I chose the
PRC tools since they seem to be friendlier then the ones from Palm
itself.

However every time I run the setup program it finds the location for
the tools properly. However it complains that something caused it to
become an incomplete download and wants me to try again. So I do.
Setup then drags its feet and does not do anything. Incidentally this
is the second time this has happened. This time I decided to join the
list and mention this here.
--
Gregg C Levine gre...@gm...
"This signature was once found posting rude
 messages in English in the Moscow subway."

Re: building prc-tools on Solaris 8 x86

[John M. <jma...@us...>]

On Dec 12, 2005, at 16:19, Jordan Dimitrov wrote:
> I had originally the following problem. The configuration process was 
> terminating with the error: cannot configure for target 
> m68k-unknown-palmos,
[...]
> Now the package configures fine. However, the build process stops with
>
> ./tm.h:6:29: m68k/m68kpalmos.h: No such file or directory

Both of these problems suggest that you have not applied the Palm 
OS-specific patches to the stock GCC 2.95.3 (which is what you still 
are stuck with on m68k Palm OS).

> Effectively, the m68kpalmos.h header is missing from the distributions 
> of gcc.

The file is not present in an unmodified GCC 2.95.3 tree, but is added 
by prc-tools's gcc-2.95.3.palmos.diff.  Reread BUILDING.html, and if 
that doesn't help, post again with rather more of a trace of how and 
where your build goes astray.  (script(1) comes in handy here.)

     John

building prc-tools on Solaris 8 x86

[Jordan D. <jo...@dm...>]

I had originally the following problem. The configuration process was 
terminating with the error: cannot configure for target 
m68k-unknown-palmos, which I fixed by including the full 
--target=m68k-palmos-coff in the config line. Now the package configures 
fine. However, the build process stops with

./tm.h:6:29: m68k/m68kpalmos.h: No such file or directory
*** Error code 1

Effectively, the m68kpalmos.h header is missing from the distributions of 
gcc. As far as I can gather, this file should be in 
gcc-src/gcc/config/m68k and it isn't! Can anyone help?

============
Jordan

Re: Can't get going

[Ton v. O. <v-o...@ci...>]

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Antony Gelberg wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure this seems very basic to all of you, but I'm not having much luck
> with the prc tools so far.  Perhaps I don't understand the architecture.
>
> I'd like to build libvorbis and eventually a front-end, so that I can play
> .ogg files on my T3.  I'm using Debian Sarge to cross-compile, and I've
> noted so far, that m68k-palmos-gcc requires PilotMain to be present.
>
> Fine for a Palm app, I suppose, but how can I port the library?  Clearly
> there is no PilotMain().  Do I need to use normal gcc for arm?  Is this
> idea doomed?
>
> Antony

What is it you want to do? I suppose you want to implement most of this
as ARM code, i.e. as a so called PNOlet.
It seems you are not clear about when to use m68k-palmos-gcc and when to
use arm-palmos-gcc.
You will have to read up about PNOlet development in the PalmOS
development documentation available from PalmSource:
http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/docs/68k_books.html.
For PNOlets in particular see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/docs/palmos/PalmOSCompanion/PalmOS5ARM_Chapter.html

For more general info on PalmOS devleopment see also
http://flippinbits.com/twiki/bin/view/FAQ/WebHome.

HTH
Ton van Overbeek

Re: Can't get going

[John M. <jma...@us...>]

On Sep 24, 2005, at 9:55, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> I'd like to build libvorbis and eventually a front-end, so that I can 
> play
> .ogg files on my T3.  I'm using Debian Sarge to cross-compile, and I've
> noted so far, that m68k-palmos-gcc requires PilotMain to be present.

Apparently your problem is that you don't know anything at all about 
Palm OS programming.  I recommend a book; I believe Neil Rhodes & Julie 
McKeehan's O'Reilly book and Lonnie Foster's Bible book are generally 
considered to be the benchmarks.

I also recommend that you read the charter for a mailing list before 
you post to it.  In this case, you would have known that your question 
was off-topic on this list, and that somewhere like palm-dev-forum 
would be of more use to you.

     John

Can't get going

[Antony G. <an...@wa...>]

Hi all,

I'm sure this seems very basic to all of you, but I'm not having much luck
with the prc tools so far.  Perhaps I don't understand the architecture.

I'd like to build libvorbis and eventually a front-end, so that I can play
.ogg files on my T3.  I'm using Debian Sarge to cross-compile, and I've
noted so far, that m68k-palmos-gcc requires PilotMain to be present.

Fine for a Palm app, I suppose, but how can I port the library?  Clearly
there is no PilotMain().  Do I need to use normal gcc for arm?  Is this
idea doomed?

Antony

Re: prc-tools and gcc development

[Ton v. O. <v-o...@ci...>]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Ken Raeburn wrote:
<snip>
> Well, kind of: "Can I help?"
>
> I've worked on both gcc and binutils before, including a little bit
> of work with the i960 back ends (one of the ones supporting link-time
> relaxation).  I've got a few ideas of my own, as a relatively
> uninformed observer who hasn't dug into it yet... certainly link-time
> relaxation was on the list.  I've got a Visor I'd like to build code
> for, and a few months ago got my hands on a newer PalmOS pda (new
> enough to be arm-based I think, though I haven't really started
> playing with it), but the section annotations and other issues are
> annoying enough that I'm using codewarrior for stuff that isn't Palm-
> specific.  I've got wireless cards for both, and my day job is all
> about network security software (Kerberos, specifically), so I'd kind
> of like to be able to throw together some sample app or two for
> PalmOS that uses it, but the easiest place to start would be the
> existing code base we have; not cluttering it up with lots of PalmOS
> annotations for every function would be a good thing.
>
> But between work, packing up and moving in the next couple of weeks,
> and a couple other random software projects I'm hacking on, I'm not
> sure how much time I've got.  Apparently I can't even keep track of
> all my email.  :-(  If I can get work interested in PDA ports,
> though.... :-)
>
> Have you put your ideas together into any sort of road map?  Perhaps
> I can help move it a few steps along when I've got time.  Especially
> if, for example, some of the gcc work can happen without having the
> relaxing linker working yet, etc.
>

Ken,

The short answer to your "Can I help?": yes.

As you might know I have been more on the gdb side of prc-tools. I have
been looking at the gcc/binutils side too, but I am not a compiler expert.

There are some hints about a roadmap in older posts from John.
Wade through the prc-tools-devel archive and you might be able to find
them.
The major thing to be done is to replace the prcrel code with the one in
gcc-3.x (or should we immediately go to gcc-4.x ?). The whole
multi-section business has to be reviewed/changed, so maybe we can get rid
of most of the hacks there. This certainly affects binutils (i.e. ld).

Of course these type of changes affect gdb and hence I am very interested in
discussing, checking and testing such changes.

From an end-user point of view we need better C++ support than we have
now (gcc-2.95.3 is quite old). I believe that PalmOS5 and hence 68k code
is going to be around for a while.
Of course also the ARM side needs to be looked at. On my own todo list
there is an item to get gdb for arm going with the arm debug nubs.

It seems from your previous gnu tools experiences that you are in a much
better position to help us out.

Hope to hear from you
Ton van Overbeek

Re: prc-tools and gcc development

[Ken R. <ra...@ra...>]

On Jul 28, 2005, at 12:25, John Marshall wrote:
>> Hi.  Is any work being done to get the m68k-palmos and arm-palmos
>> support into the mainline gcc (binutils, gdb) sources?
> The short answer is no.  The longer answer is yes, depending on  
> people actually doing the work.

Ah, like too many projects... :-(
Thanks for the info.

> So in general the real answer is that for a few years these things  
> have not been being submitted to mainline, because they are not  
> really in a state such that that would be reasonable.  There's a  
> bit of work needed, I'm the only person (of whom I am aware [1])  
> who has done any significant work on the Palm OS GCC/binutils side  
> in the last, oh, seven years, and sadly I haven't done anything  
> significant on them in the last couple of years.  But I do have  
> lots of ideas for what needs to be done :-).
>
> I'm sorry it's taken me so long to answer your email.  The delay  
> may give you a hint as to how motivated I am to work on these  
> things these days.  Sadly, years of borderline malevolence from Palm 
> (Source), of ungratefulness from clueless users, and of observing  
> Palm OS's ongoing death spiral, have taken their toll.  I would  
> like to still care about prc-tools, but I haven't been able to  
> muster much for a while.  That could conceivably change, but I'm  
> not holding my breath.

I'm familiar with that problem, too...

> Well, that's an answer to the question you actually asked.  Perhaps  
> there was another question hiding behind it...? :-)

Well, kind of: "Can I help?"

I've worked on both gcc and binutils before, including a little bit  
of work with the i960 back ends (one of the ones supporting link-time  
relaxation).  I've got a few ideas of my own, as a relatively  
uninformed observer who hasn't dug into it yet... certainly link-time  
relaxation was on the list.  I've got a Visor I'd like to build code  
for, and a few months ago got my hands on a newer PalmOS pda (new  
enough to be arm-based I think, though I haven't really started  
playing with it), but the section annotations and other issues are  
annoying enough that I'm using codewarrior for stuff that isn't Palm- 
specific.  I've got wireless cards for both, and my day job is all  
about network security software (Kerberos, specifically), so I'd kind  
of like to be able to throw together some sample app or two for  
PalmOS that uses it, but the easiest place to start would be the  
existing code base we have; not cluttering it up with lots of PalmOS  
annotations for every function would be a good thing.

But between work, packing up and moving in the next couple of weeks,  
and a couple other random software projects I'm hacking on, I'm not  
sure how much time I've got.  Apparently I can't even keep track of  
all my email.  :-(  If I can get work interested in PDA ports,  
though.... :-)

Have you put your ideas together into any sort of road map?  Perhaps  
I can help move it a few steps along when I've got time.  Especially  
if, for example, some of the gcc work can happen without having the  
relaxing linker working yet, etc.

Ken

Re: prc-tools and gcc development

[John M. <jma...@us...>]

On Jul 1, 2005, at 13:47, Ken Raeburn wrote:
> Hi.  Is any work being done to get the m68k-palmos and arm-palmos
> support into the mainline gcc (binutils, gdb) sources?

Hi Ken.

The short answer is no.  The longer answer is yes, depending on people 
actually doing the work.

The situation is different for each of the mainline packages.  
arm-palmos GCC is a simple case, because as yet there is not much 
there: in particular, it needs some GOT work to become minimally 
usable.  The m68k-palmos GCC stuff is still based on GCC 2.95.x and 
needs major rewriting, both to bring it up to the modern 4.x 
infrastructure and (more importantly) the handling of multiple code 
resources needs rewriting (in terms of jump sequence relaxation -- much 
of the work moves to the linker).  Also much of the m68k-palmos-gcc 
support is not in a state that would be acceptable in the mainline 
sources.  There is not too much in the binutils patches and it is 
mostly in a reasonable state, but it would likely change with some of 
the m68k-palmos-gcc-related rewriting.  And gdb is another story again, 
and Ton probably has something to say here.

So in general the real answer is that for a few years these things have 
not been being submitted to mainline, because they are not really in a 
state such that that would be reasonable.  There's a bit of work 
needed, I'm the only person (of whom I am aware [1]) who has done any 
significant work on the Palm OS GCC/binutils side in the last, oh, 
seven years, and sadly I haven't done anything significant on them in 
the last couple of years.  But I do have lots of ideas for what needs 
to be done :-).

I'm sorry it's taken me so long to answer your email.  The delay may 
give you a hint as to how motivated I am to work on these things these 
days.  Sadly, years of borderline malevolence from Palm(Source), of 
ungratefulness from clueless users, and of observing Palm OS's ongoing 
death spiral, have taken their toll.  I would like to still care about 
prc-tools, but I haven't been able to muster much for a while.  That 
could conceivably change, but I'm not holding my breath.

Anyway, I'm going on holiday for three weeks tomorrow, and I wanted to 
give you some kind of answer first, so here it is :-).

Well, that's an answer to the question you actually asked.  Perhaps 
there was another question hiding behind it...? :-)

     John

[1] Well, apart from one debacle which you can search various archives 
for.  Sadly, in the end nothing truly useful came from that 
conflagration.