#471 From: "Andrew Belov" <andrew_belov@...>
Date: Tue Aug 27, 2002 5:50 pm
Subject: Re: CVS updates/additions/problems.... a_belov2001
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:49:10 +0200 (CDT), Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2) wrote:
>problems:
>-: set and pause do not link (when using libc llayer) due to missing getch and
setenv
>functions, while getch will be replaced by cmd_getkey, setenv is mandatory...
Andrew
>can you fix this?
I think a POSIXly correct setenv() is not achievable with IBM's LIBC. Rather
than
enlarging the environment block, its _putenv() implementation requires you to
hold the
string in RAM until the program ends or the string is replaced with a subsequent
_putenv().
As a quick hack (memory leaks will occur) you may try out this one:
int _System setenv(char *name, char *val, int overwrite)
{
char *buf;
int l_n, rc;
if(strchr(name, '=')!=NULL)
{
errno=EINVAL;
return(-1);
}
errno=0;
if(!overwrite&&getenv(name)!=NULL)
return(0);
if((buf=(char *)malloc((l_n=strlen(name))+strlen(val)+2))==NULL)
{
errno=ENOMEM;
return(-1);
}
strcpy(buf, name);
buf[l_n]='=';
strcpy(buf+l_n+1, val);
rc=_putenv(buf);
return(rc);
}
Part 16 - Aug 19 2002
Re: Part 16
#472 From: "Yuri Prokushev" <prokushev@...>
Date: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:04 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:35:02 +0200 (CDT), Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2) wrote:
>>I know. But more info required. BTW, having openwatcom and toolset (as source
as
>binaries) in cvs will be nice.
>binaries are accessible from our site (11.0c), sources are not but.. If we are
not gona
>modify them (and I'm not, at least not in near future) there is no reason tu
put in our cvs -
>if there will be a newer version Michael will notify us about that.
Problem is I can't access to osfree's ftp. All dirs is empty (build, docs, etc.)
excluding cvssnapshot. I can download watcom from other places but not other
build tools.
>>For foreign sources this is not so easy. For example, regina rexx have some
>additions, but compatible with IBM REXX. NewView has not same interface. But I
don't
>see
>>any problems if something added, but not removed.
>He meant, that we should first get everything to work, then enchance Of
course
>NewView and ReginaRexx are out of this 'rule' as work on them is made by others
>(nice of them )
Of couse. mkmsgf planned to be full clone of original mkmsgf for the first time.
With regina required some work to be fully compatible with ibm's rexx. NewView
is not yet
fully view compatible but supports most of used stuffs.
>>Only problem is newview/mkmsgf is pascal-based projects.
>Do you have any idea, how to fit with them into current makefile system?
For mkmsfg no any problems, I'm using gnu make, so I can easely modify makefiles
for nmake/wmake. But newview uses sibyl which not true opensource yet, but,
again,
no problems with building with makefiles. After small research I post proposal
to integrate pascal projects to current build system. With opensibyl project we
can have
pascal toolkit as well.
>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>btw about OpenSybil project, last time when I was using Sybil, they had it's
own controls
>for everything, while it mayy be good, I think it would be much better to
support standard
>OS controls (eg for GUI consistency)
Well. I'm thinking about usage of standard os controls instead of sibyl's own.
This reduces executible size. But too far for this yet. Forms.pas doesn't work
fully as yet. First
goal is to port SDVE(IDE) to Free Pascal Compiler. Next target is full OS/2 API
support (with som/wps/tcpip/mmos2 and many others).
BTW, Is it possible to make multi-codepage msgs instead if classic single
language msgs when msg files compilation will be added to makefiles? This is
small but
usefull extension.
Date: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:04 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:35:02 +0200 (CDT), Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2) wrote:
>>I know. But more info required. BTW, having openwatcom and toolset (as source
as
>binaries) in cvs will be nice.
>binaries are accessible from our site (11.0c), sources are not but.. If we are
not gona
>modify them (and I'm not, at least not in near future) there is no reason tu
put in our cvs -
>if there will be a newer version Michael will notify us about that.
Problem is I can't access to osfree's ftp. All dirs is empty (build, docs, etc.)
excluding cvssnapshot. I can download watcom from other places but not other
build tools.
>>For foreign sources this is not so easy. For example, regina rexx have some
>additions, but compatible with IBM REXX. NewView has not same interface. But I
don't
>see
>>any problems if something added, but not removed.
>He meant, that we should first get everything to work, then enchance Of
course
>NewView and ReginaRexx are out of this 'rule' as work on them is made by others
>(nice of them )
Of couse. mkmsgf planned to be full clone of original mkmsgf for the first time.
With regina required some work to be fully compatible with ibm's rexx. NewView
is not yet
fully view compatible but supports most of used stuffs.
>>Only problem is newview/mkmsgf is pascal-based projects.
>Do you have any idea, how to fit with them into current makefile system?
For mkmsfg no any problems, I'm using gnu make, so I can easely modify makefiles
for nmake/wmake. But newview uses sibyl which not true opensource yet, but,
again,
no problems with building with makefiles. After small research I post proposal
to integrate pascal projects to current build system. With opensibyl project we
can have
pascal toolkit as well.
>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>btw about OpenSybil project, last time when I was using Sybil, they had it's
own controls
>for everything, while it mayy be good, I think it would be much better to
support standard
>OS controls (eg for GUI consistency)
Well. I'm thinking about usage of standard os controls instead of sibyl's own.
This reduces executible size. But too far for this yet. Forms.pas doesn't work
fully as yet. First
goal is to port SDVE(IDE) to Free Pascal Compiler. Next target is full OS/2 API
support (with som/wps/tcpip/mmos2 and many others).
BTW, Is it possible to make multi-codepage msgs instead if classic single
language msgs when msg files compilation will be added to makefiles? This is
small but
usefull extension.
Re: Part 16
#473 From: "Yuri Prokushev" <prokushev@...>
Date: Tue Aug 27, 2002 9:19 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:34:52 +0200, JMA wrote:
>>He meant, that we should first get everything to work, then enchance Of
course
>>NewView and ReginaRexx are out of this 'rule' as work on them is made by
others
>>(nice of them )
>I dont see any us and them here.
>
>Whatever app that runs on osFree is great and the more apps that runs the
better.
>If they are part of the CVS or developed outside the main project is
irrelevant.
>
>Or should we expect OS/2 developers to turn to Microsofts licencing scheme
>
>This application is only allowed to run on genuine IBM(R) OS/2(R) Warp(TM) 4.x,
>you are not allowed to run it on eComStation, using VPC or and FreeOS, osFree
>or Windows or Linux.
Which application??? Or this is 'quote'?
>Lets keep osFree as an OS project and worry about additions later.
Date: Tue Aug 27, 2002 9:19 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:34:52 +0200, JMA wrote:
>>He meant, that we should first get everything to work, then enchance Of
course
>>NewView and ReginaRexx are out of this 'rule' as work on them is made by
others
>>(nice of them )
>I dont see any us and them here.
>
>Whatever app that runs on osFree is great and the more apps that runs the
better.
>If they are part of the CVS or developed outside the main project is
irrelevant.
>
>Or should we expect OS/2 developers to turn to Microsofts licencing scheme
>
>This application is only allowed to run on genuine IBM(R) OS/2(R) Warp(TM) 4.x,
>you are not allowed to run it on eComStation, using VPC or and FreeOS, osFree
>or Windows or Linux.
Which application??? Or this is 'quote'?
>Lets keep osFree as an OS project and worry about additions later.
Re: Part 16
#474 From: "Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2)" <bart2@...>
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 7:32 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 18:04:02 +0400 (EDT), Yuri Prokushev wrote:
>Problem is I can't access to osfree's ftp. All dirs is empty (build, docs,
etc.) excluding
cvssnapshot. I can download watcom from other places but not other build tools.
ftp problems... Michael?
btw there are no other build tools (yet)
>For mkmsfg no any problems, I'm using gnu make, so I can easely modify
makefiles
for nmake/wmake.
so I see no problem
>But newview uses sibyl which not true opensource yet, but, again,
>no problems with building with makefiles. After small research I post proposal
to
integrate pascal projects to current build system. With opensibyl project we can
have
>pascal toolkit as well.
>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
beter pascal then nothing
>BTW, Is it possible to make multi-codepage msgs instead if classic single
language
msgs when msg files compilation will be added to makefiles? This is small but
>usefull extension.
it's too early to speak about this, but again I see no reason why not to do this
(keeping
signle-codepage way too)
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 7:32 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 18:04:02 +0400 (EDT), Yuri Prokushev wrote:
>Problem is I can't access to osfree's ftp. All dirs is empty (build, docs,
etc.) excluding
cvssnapshot. I can download watcom from other places but not other build tools.
ftp problems... Michael?
btw there are no other build tools (yet)
>For mkmsfg no any problems, I'm using gnu make, so I can easely modify
makefiles
for nmake/wmake.
so I see no problem
>But newview uses sibyl which not true opensource yet, but, again,
>no problems with building with makefiles. After small research I post proposal
to
integrate pascal projects to current build system. With opensibyl project we can
have
>pascal toolkit as well.
>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
beter pascal then nothing
>BTW, Is it possible to make multi-codepage msgs instead if classic single
language
msgs when msg files compilation will be added to makefiles? This is small but
>usefull extension.
it's too early to speak about this, but again I see no reason why not to do this
(keeping
signle-codepage way too)
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Re: Part 16
#475 From: "Yuri Prokushev" <prokushev@...>
Date: Thu Aug 29, 2002 12:13 am
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:32:42 +0200 (CDT), Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2) wrote:
>btw there are no other build tools (yet)
Well. How about auto-doc utils?
>>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>beter pascal then nothing
I prefer pascal
Date: Thu Aug 29, 2002 12:13 am
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:32:42 +0200 (CDT), Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2) wrote:
>btw there are no other build tools (yet)
Well. How about auto-doc utils?
>>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>beter pascal then nothing
I prefer pascal
Re: Part 16
#476 From: "Michal Necasek" <michaln@...>
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 9:40 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree michalnec
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 00:13:33 +0400 (EDT), Yuri Prokushev wrote:
>>>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>>>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>>beter pascal then nothing
>I prefer pascal
>
Pascal sucks for professional development. And that's a fact.
Pascal is a horrid language. Turbo Pascal is way better. But
the real problem isn't the language, it's the tools. I have
never seen a Pascal compiler that comes anywhere close in
power and flexibility to the likes of IBM's VAC++ or Watcom
or gcc Even if it did, it's usually not very portable.
And the biggest problem of course is the fact that all
documentation and sample code is geared towards C/C++ and
so are all libraries. Can the Pascal compilers even use
the _cdecl or _Optlink calling convention?
Pascal is fine for small self-contained project. Pretty much
useless for system programming. How do you debug Pascal stuff
with ICAT?
Of course you can disagree all you want but that doesn't make
Pascal any better
Michal
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 9:40 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree michalnec
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 00:13:33 +0400 (EDT), Yuri Prokushev wrote:
>>>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>>>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>>beter pascal then nothing
>I prefer pascal
>
Pascal sucks for professional development. And that's a fact.
Pascal is a horrid language. Turbo Pascal is way better. But
the real problem isn't the language, it's the tools. I have
never seen a Pascal compiler that comes anywhere close in
power and flexibility to the likes of IBM's VAC++ or Watcom
or gcc Even if it did, it's usually not very portable.
And the biggest problem of course is the fact that all
documentation and sample code is geared towards C/C++ and
so are all libraries. Can the Pascal compilers even use
the _cdecl or _Optlink calling convention?
Pascal is fine for small self-contained project. Pretty much
useless for system programming. How do you debug Pascal stuff
with ICAT?
Of course you can disagree all you want but that doesn't make
Pascal any better
Michal
Re: Part 16
#477 From: "Michal Necasek" <michaln@...>
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 9:41 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree michalnec
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:32:42 +0200 (CDT), Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2) wrote:
>ftp problems... Michael?
>
Don't look at me, I can't help you with the FTP
Michal
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 9:41 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree michalnec
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:32:42 +0200 (CDT), Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2) wrote:
>ftp problems... Michael?
>
Don't look at me, I can't help you with the FTP
Michal
Re: Part 16
#478 From: "Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2)" <bart2@...>
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:33 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 00:13:33 +0400 (EDT), Yuri Prokushev wrote:
>>btw there are no other build tools (yet)
>Well. How about auto-doc utils?
we use doxygen, it's on hobbes (but yes, it should be also available on ftp... )
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:33 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 00:13:33 +0400 (EDT), Yuri Prokushev wrote:
>>btw there are no other build tools (yet)
>Well. How about auto-doc utils?
we use doxygen, it's on hobbes (but yes, it should be also available on ftp... )
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Re: Part 16
#479 From: "Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2)" <bart2@...>
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:34 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:41:26 -0700 (PDT), Michal Necasek wrote:
>>ftp problems... Michael?
>>
> Don't look at me, I can't help you with the FTP
hehe, my mistake ))
Martin! )
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Date: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:34 pm
Subject: Re: Re: osFree ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:41:26 -0700 (PDT), Michal Necasek wrote:
>>ftp problems... Michael?
>>
> Don't look at me, I can't help you with the FTP
hehe, my mistake ))
Martin! )
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Re: Part 16
#480 From: "Yuri Prokushev" <prokushev@...>
Date: Thu Aug 29, 2002 1:56 am
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:40:31 -0700 (PDT), Michal Necasek wrote:
>>>>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>>>>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>>>beter pascal then nothing
>>I prefer pascal
> Pascal sucks for professional development. And that's a fact.
Standard Pascal - yes.
> Pascal is a horrid language. Turbo Pascal is way better.
Well. Turbo Pascal very old.
> But
>the real problem isn't the language, it's the tools. I have
>never seen a Pascal compiler that comes anywhere close in
>power and flexibility to the likes of IBM's VAC++ or Watcom
>or gcc Even if it did, it's usually not very portable.
Which tools? for example?
> And the biggest problem of course is the fact that all
>documentation and sample code is geared towards C/C++ and
>so are all libraries. Can the Pascal compilers even use
>the _cdecl or _Optlink calling convention?
Hm... Any known compiler.
> Pascal is fine for small self-contained project. Pretty much
>useless for system programming. How do you debug Pascal stuff
>with ICAT?
Is any problems?
> Of course you can disagree all you want but that doesn't make
>Pascal any better
I don't want to be in holy wars. This is stupid. I use language which I like.
Date: Thu Aug 29, 2002 1:56 am
Subject: Re: Re: osFree prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:40:31 -0700 (PDT), Michal Necasek wrote:
>>>>>Or maybe, mkmsgf can be built using C?
>>>>No. Only If rewrite, but I will not do this.
>>>beter pascal then nothing
>>I prefer pascal
> Pascal sucks for professional development. And that's a fact.
Standard Pascal - yes.
> Pascal is a horrid language. Turbo Pascal is way better.
Well. Turbo Pascal very old.
> But
>the real problem isn't the language, it's the tools. I have
>never seen a Pascal compiler that comes anywhere close in
>power and flexibility to the likes of IBM's VAC++ or Watcom
>or gcc Even if it did, it's usually not very portable.
Which tools? for example?
> And the biggest problem of course is the fact that all
>documentation and sample code is geared towards C/C++ and
>so are all libraries. Can the Pascal compilers even use
>the _cdecl or _Optlink calling convention?
Hm... Any known compiler.
> Pascal is fine for small self-contained project. Pretty much
>useless for system programming. How do you debug Pascal stuff
>with ICAT?
Is any problems?
> Of course you can disagree all you want but that doesn't make
>Pascal any better
I don't want to be in holy wars. This is stupid. I use language which I like.