Mail Archives: djgpp/2009/06/28/21:17:33
Hi,
On Jun 28, 1:59=A0pm, Eli Zaretskii <e DOT DOT DOT AT gnu DOT org> wrote:
> > From: Rugxulo <rugx DOT DOT DOT AT gmail DOT com>
> > Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:41:56 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > "make install" took approx. 4 1/2 mins.
>
> Is it good or bad?
>
> If bad, what part took most of the time?
Sorry for the confusion, but it's fine, no problem. That's quite fast.
What I actually meant was "make install" will build (if not already)
and then put the .EXEs in \bin in approx. 4 mins. Just for curiosity,
I wanted to see how long it would take. I didn't mean the "install"
part was slow.
> > However, on XP or FreeDOS, if using GCC 2.95.3 (oldy moldy which I'm
> > fond of), it seems to hang at loadup.el (I think)
>
> What do you see if you interrupt it at this stage (you will need to
> run it under GDB for this to work).
I don't know if it's worth investigating, but I may try again
tomorrow. Obviously I didn't much expect anyone to use 2.95.3 anymore
(although I imagine it's not ideal that it doesn't, I mean, it's still
a good compiler, and 2001 isn't exactly ancient). I could guess
alignment issues or maybe the malloc, but who knows.
> > "C-x 5 1" etc. (frames) seem to be giving problems (FreeDOS or Vista).
>
> Ouch! =A0Thanks for reporting this, patch to fix it below.
Heh. ;-)
> > Either way, Make (3.79.1 or 3.81) seemed to have problems
> > finding test-distrib.c
>
> Please show the signs of these problems.
I can't quote exactly without booting DOS, but it just won't even
compile anything until I change the definition of srcdir. I don't know
what causes this, a FreeDOS incompatibility, Make + FreeDOS, FreeCOM,
who knows. The only surefire way to figure it out is to try another
DOS and/or shell.
> > instead of the weird shell hack that is trying to use "e:/emacs"
> > instead
>
> Sorry, I don't follow: what weird hack, and why does it use e:/emacs?
Heh, okay, lemme find the lines and explicitly mention them. (Note
that I also noticed that it worked fine on XP, so for whatever reason
it only has issues under pure FreeDOS.) Identifying this quirk alone
took quite a long time, but I didn't want to report back without some
idea of what was wrong.
--------------------------
# (emacs-23.0.95/Makefile):
#
# Generate a full pathname of the top-level installation directory
top_srcdir :=3D $(subst \,/,$(shell cd))
# won't work in FreeDOS unless manually changed
# to "/dev/e/emacs" or whatever
--------------------------
In other words, in FreeDOS GNU make can't find test-distrib.c at all
until this is manually fixed. (GNU make is annoyingly picky.)
> > "C-x i" (can't find Info dir in FreeDOS w/ SFNs, but Vista w/ LFNs work=
s
> > okay).
>
> I believe you mean "C-h i".
Yes, sorry.
> Do you have INFOPATH set on any of these machines? =A0Please look in
> djgpp.env: it sets things up so that Emacs expects to find the Info
> files that come with Emacs in %DJDIR%/gnu/emacs/info; if you installed
> Emacs in some other directory, you will need to set INFOPATH to point
> to its `info' subdirectory.
I meant without DJGPP detected, active, or installed, Emacs can't find
its own .info files except under LFN environment (Windows).
> If all of this does not help, please show your value of the variable
> Info-directory-list after you type "C-h i".
I'm not on DOS now, so I can't tell you what it says there. But it
seems that it's all defined in PATHS.EL anyways.
> > I also tried with 3.4.4 for laughs just in case some of it was
> > GCC version specific, but no apparent differences (well, no silly
> > alignment warnings, 2.95.3 says "... too much, defaulting to 4 " a
> > lot) beyond a slightly bigger .EXE (well, and the above loadup issue
> > which 3.4.4 doesn't have, but it doesn't have 8-byte alignment either,
> > so the above download is using GCC 4.4.0).
>
> I use GCC 3.4.4 and don't have any alignment issues.
Really? CONFIG.BAT whines for me. And I thought you were using 3.4.3,
finally upgraded? ;-)
> Thanks again for testing. =A0Here's the patch for the problem with
> "C-x 5 1" (already in the Emacs repository):
Thanks for the quick patch. :-)
Can somebody else try building on Vista (config.bat --with-system-
malloc msdos), and see if it fails? As mentioned, it doesn't take
long, only a few minutes.
- Raw text -