This is the mail archive of the cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: Use Tcp.h?


--- Harold L Hunt <huntharo@msu.edu> wrote:
> Nicholas,
> 
> > Anyhow, I think we are missing the whole point of this thread, what
> were
> > *YOUR* findings. 
> 
> I forgot to draw attention to what I found, but I did post your build
> snippet
> with warnings and my build snippet that didn't have warnings for the
> same file.
> 
> My overall results were that I got no new errors or warnings.  I did a
> 'make
> install' and ran the server with local clients as well as with a -query
> to a
> KDE machine with no problems.
> 
> > Again, I'm sorry for not sticking to it exactly.  So what were your
> > findings from your build?  What is your conclusion?
> 
> The conclusion is that we might as well remove -DNO_TCP_H and the #if
> !defined(__CYGWIN__) from whatever file I said it was in.  (Note that
> -DNO_TCP_H was present in the initial version of cygwin.cf... so it is
> just a
> define that has not been noticed as uneeded until now.)

Well there is no point in keeping stale defines around, is there? 
Obviously you were curious, otherwise you wouldn't have invested so much
time.  :-)

> > > On a side note, I find it hard enough to remember all the
> > > builds/flags/compilers/etc that I'm using.  I don't have any space
> in my
> > > brain to store state information for other developers.  You have to
> feed
> > > me some details everytime you ask a question, else you can assume
> that
> > I've
> > > forgotten those details.
> > 
> > 
> > OK, next time I'll be better.
> 
> Appreciated.
> 
> > However, are you aware that the CVS HEAD isn't even building period
> with
> > regards to your cross directions?  It fails in the initial stages,
> because
> > it seems that some of the macros you have defined in your host.def are
> no
> > longer valid.  If you do not believe me, try it yourself.  It seems
> that
> > they have mucked around with the cross building configuration files
> and
> > rules files.  We better get on them about that, too.  I believe that
> some
> > stupid SuSE developer is responsible for the whole mess...
> 
> Oh, I believe you.  But like I said in another post (which hadn't been
> written
> when you wrote this), I'll have to do a substantial amount of work to my
> Linux
> machine to be able to do a cross compile of Cygwin/XFree86.
> 
> > P.S. - When you get a chance, you should read those other posts I
> made,
> > especially regarding the conflicting files in lesstif and
> XFree86-prog...

I have, you cleared things up for me.  No big deal right now, but *if* you
have some spare time this weekend maybe you could give that hdd install a
try...  Not that I know all the facts, but surely a hdd install takes less
then 10 hours?

> I read them, but you're going to have to do more than just suggest what
> to do
> with the host.def files.  I hope you realize that your simple, ``should
> we
> remove -DNO_TCP_H'', question has cost me about 5 hours already in
> looking at
> source files, doing build tests and writing detailed correspondence to
> the
> mailing list.

I take it that you feel this wasn't worth it?  I'm sorry then, I was just
trying to be helpful.

> Now you are asking about Lesstif's host.def and our host.def and all I
> can see
> is that our host.def is empty so I can't see what problems it will cause
> for
> us not to do anything with the host.def files.  Furthermore, I don't see
> how
> you could even fix this with pre-remove and postinstall scripts.  I
> mean, how
> are you going to determine which host.def file is installed, how are you
> going
> to determine if you need to remove the currently installed host.def file
> (maybe package Z's host.def file was already overwritten by another
> package
> installation), and how are you going to determine which host.def to
> install in
> place of the one that are you are removing?  Not to mention what sort of
> naming/storage convention are you going to use to identify the original
> host.def files that come with each package?
> 
> So yeah, I read your post and I saw that it raised more questions than
> it
> answered, so I forgot about it.  I'm leaving this one up to you, or
> somebody
> else, to figure out.
> 
> You have to remember, as I've said time and time again, I'm a horrible X
> user
> and I'm even a horrible X developer.  You see, I don't have years of
> experience with hundreds of X programs and with hundreds of X libraries.
>  I
> only have experience with X Server implementation and in that I only
> have
> experience with X Server development for Cygwin.  I just don't have
> enough
> experience to solve questions about host.def files easily.

I've never heard you say these remarks regarding your X skills, I just
assumed...  Well, the point is this.  Move your host.def file to some
temporary location.  Then get a project that uses Imakefiles and run xmkmf
in it's source directory.  You'll see that xmkmf requires a host.def,
empty or not, to proceed with making the makefile.  I simply proposed a
possible solution, I didn't expect you to deal with it instantly.  It is
just something that you should be aware of as a potential gotcha.  I'm
still thinking about how best to impliment the scripts, so that is why I
submitted the issue to the list, in case someone else had an idea.

Cheers,
Nicholas

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]