Brad,

tested with CodeWarrior command line tools, Watcom and gcc under Win32.

getuuid.c: Disassembled then to see if affected "big number" is handled right way by all compilers (as uint64). Everything seemed to be okay without explicit LL modifier.

config.hnw: Problem with missing memory.h can be solved by putting libc/include/nks into include paths, but I'm not sure if it is right way. Obviously, this header file is not needed here, so why to include this one... I'm only wondering, that this file is found by CW, even if path to nks/ is not explicitly specified (perhaps I missed something?)...

Thanks,
Pavel

Pavel Novy wrote:
Brad,

sorry, I didn't - my installation of CW is broken at the moment - perhaps I will try with command line tools this evening...

Thanks,
Pavel

Brad Nicholes wrote:
 > Pavel,
 >     Have you verified that these changed don't affect the CodeWarrior
 > compiler?
 >
 > Brad
 >
 > Brad Nicholes
 > Senior Software Engineer
 > Novell, Inc., a leading provider of Net business solutions
 > http://www.novell.com
 >
 >
 >>>>Pavel Novy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Monday, February 18, 2002 1:05:29 PM
 >>>>
 >>>>
 > Brad,
 > I've finally succeeded with the build of aprlib.nlm with OpenWatcom.
 > Here are two patches needed to apply to make Watcom compiler happy
 > (attached).
 >
 > getuuid.c.patch: Watcom is not familiar with LL:
 >
 > Watcom C32 Optimizing Compiler  Version 11.0c
 > Copyright by Sybase, Inc., and its subsidiaries, 1984, 2000.
 > All rights reserved.  Watcom is a trademark of Sybase, Inc.
 > .\..\srclib\apr\misc\unix\getuuid.c(146): Error! E1009: Expecting ';'
 > but found 'L'
 > .\..\srclib\apr\misc\unix\getuuid.c: 240 lines, included 24521, 0
 > warnings, 1 errors
 > make: *** [../../srclib/apr/misc/unix/getuuid.obj] Error 8
 >
 > config.hnw.patch: There is no memory.h in paths (there is only
 > <nks/memory.h> in LIBC's include subdirectory), so compilation is
 > aborted with an error. It seems there is no need to include this header
 >
 > file (gcc, Watcom).
 >
 > Regards,
 > Pavel
 >
 >








Reply via email to