Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20001105124326.00ade980@pop5.banet.net> X-Sender: usbanet DOT farley3 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 13:10:01 -0500 To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com From: "Peter J. Farley III" Subject: How do I build an isolated test version with new fcntl? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Hi all, I am at a bit of a loss here. While trying to fix fcntl.c based on Mark E.'s version, I ran make in the /src directory. This was obviously a mistake, since the make went and re-made all the basic DJGPP binaries in the /bin directory along with libc, libm, etc. in the /lib directory. I am more used to the general run of make/test/install setups, where the new version is automatically made *ONLY* in the local build directory, tested from there with "make test", and only *then* installed in the final destination directories by "make install". What is the "right way" to set up a "build and test" environment for these fcntl changes that doesn't wipe out my main (and only) DJGPP installation? Do I have to set up a parallel DJGPP installation that I'm not afraid to trash with bad builds? Do I have to restore (from djdev203.zip, etc.) the original executables and libs between each build, in case the build causes failures in the basic tools? At this point, since I *think* I also saw gcc's djgpp.djl being rebuilt along the way, I'm concerned that I have to re-install gcc-2.952 as well. I have (I hope) restored my installation by unzipping djdev203.zip and overwriting everything, and then restoring my DJGPP.ENV from a saved copy. Is there anything else built by "make" in /src that I need to worry about restoring? TIA for any advice or info you can provide. --------------------------------------------------------- Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR pjfarley AT banet DOT net)