Mail Archives: djgpp/2002/03/05/12:30:10
Here is my version info:
Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]
(C) Copyright 1985-2000 Microsoft Corp.
C:\Programme\Gemeinsame Dateien\System\MAPI\1033\nt>d:
D:\>bash --version
GNU bash, version 2.05a.0(6)-release (i686-pc-msdosdjgpp)
Copyright 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
D:\>sh --version
GNU bash, version 2.05a.0(6)-release (i686-pc-msdosdjgpp)
Copyright 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
D:\>cd bin
D:\bin>.\bash.exe --version
GNU bash, version 2.04.7(1)-release (i686-pc-msdosdjgpp)
Copyright 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
D:\bin>.\sh.exe --version
GNU bash, version 2.04.7(1)-release (i686-pc-msdosdjgpp)
Copyright 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
D:\bin>
BTW, I would like not to have a \bin dir as well! How are you building?
Regards,
Ben
"Charles Sandmann" <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> wrote in message
news:3c84f79a DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu...
> > clio.rice.edu has released djgpp binaries that should run on windows
2000
>
> Actually there are two sets of images there - one set is an updated v2.03
> release (with some distributions updated) and the other is a work in
> progress CVS (to be 2.04 someday) release.
>
> So, for us to figure out what's going on, we need the date and size from
> each EXE image you are talking about.
>
> The 2.03 update provides a bash 2.04 while the cvs/2.04 provides a bash
2.05.
> There have been several releases of bash with the same numbers, so it's
> once again important to know the date and size.
>
> > In making a couple applications, I noticed that the "rice binaries"
version
> > of bash and sh 'could not find gcc.exe' when executing a configure
script
> > ("GCC unable to create executables" CONFIGURE error, also the MAKE error
> > that it couldn't find GCC.EXE)
>
> > What is more interesting is this: It is OK if the 'rice bash' is in my
> > %DJGPP%\bin; the problems occur when it is in my D:\bin (needed to run
> > configure scripts).
>
> > So the version kept in '\bin' is the Delorie dist. copy. Then configure
> > scripts run with that version without problems.
>
> > Has anyone else noticed this???
>
> I haven't noticed this doing builds on Windows 2000 (I don't even have a
> \bin directory). But my distribution isn't exactly clean either.
- Raw text -