delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2002/06/16/02:55:41

Message-ID: <003201c214f9$6efb9970$0100a8c0@p4>
From: "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
To: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
References: <001601c21399$28e58650$0100a8c0 AT p4> <2110-Sat15Jun2002190312+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Subject: Re: Clio 2.04 packages
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 15:47:14 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> > With the concensus that we should be figuring out what goes into the
2.04
> > and 2.05 releases I think that we should also have (if time and
resources
> > permit) a parallel project that also works on getting a set of updated
> > packages ready for the release at the same time as 2.04.
>
> That's true, mainly because v2.04 will support symlinks, and that
> requires all ports to be relinked, otherwise a combination of old and
> new binaries will be subtly broken.
100% agree. Old binaries do not like the new symlinks and it becomes a pain
to find out what binary is at fault. It is easy to do now that the CVS is
labelled 2.04 and you can grep the binary files for 2.03 (or 2.02 or 2.01).

> > As I see it the following packages need to be updated / released /
re-built
> > with the 2.04 release :-
>
> Can you tell why did you pick up those and not the others, especially
> given my comment about symlinks above?

The reason for these was so that I could use the following packages:-
    a) Latest GCC, was 2.9.5.3 then 3.x ... then 3.04 then and now 3.1
    b) Latest Bash 2.05 as the 2.04 was way to hard to get working and the
2.05 was allot easier
    c) Setedit - needed for Rhide
    d) Rhide - I have used Rhide since it first appeared as I like IDEs. I
was a BC++ DOS user before DJGPP.
    e) Allegro - Needed for some of the graphics programs I have written
over the years.
    f)  I use indent to reformat source code if I cannot read it or the
format is all over the place
    g)  I needed patch as I was using and producing patches

and finally
    g) I like the unix shell utilites as they are so handy, so diff, find
and shell utils.

Once I started with this list as I started to build them I found that I
needed some more packages in order to build the ones above and the list is
what I finished up with. The execption to this is tar as I needed to untar a
file and I thought I should update it.

> Please note that rebuilt packages should be at least reconfigured and
> sometimes will need source changes due to the symlink support.
I have not found that I have had to do any reconfiguring or source code
changes to any of the packages, but then again I have not fully tested
symlinks. Some of the packages install the new symlinks instead of the old
ones in the bin directory. So far I have not had any problems with symlinks,
except last year when mixing old and new exes with new symlinks.


- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019