Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1998/07/12/12:24:44
On 11 Jul 1998, Dave Love wrote:
> AP> I think it should be treated as bug in f/runtime/configure.in
> AP> as DJGPP defines both unix and __MSDOS__
>
> I'm not really sure `bug' is fair :-), but perhaps it needs working
> round in the same way as the Windows versions (although cygwin32
> doesn't need that for binary mounts AFAIK).
IMHO, it *is* a bug. It is not nice to rely on an assumption that
only compilers which produce native Unix code define `unix'. DJGPP
shows that `unix' can be defined by a compiler which targets other
systems.
In general, it is best to test for a feature rather than for a name of
an operating system. Perhaps that ifdef could be rewritten so that it
tests for the actual functionality?
> Does `port' mean that there are other changes to the source necessary
> that we (fortran) don't know about, or just mean the build on DJGPP?
> If other changes are needed, I expect we'd be happy to have them. For
> instance, does the build now work with the normal configure under
> DJGPP bash or are (fixes to) the .bat files still needed?
Since the patch is for configure.in, the DJGPP version *must* be built
by running the configure script.
The DJGPP port of Autoconf usually takes care of other DOS-isms (such
as looking for executables with "test -x" instead of "test -f").
- Raw text -