On 2013-06-16 17:37, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Dixi quodb>
Thanks! Always fun to try something new :)
So true.
You might want to read this too:
00:17 < RT|Chatzilla> just played a bit of openwatcom for linux, including
/usr/include will cause other errors.
00:17 < lynx> yes, glibc doesn't play well with non-gcc
00:17 < lynx> that'd probably work with only very few exceptions (stdarg.h,
etc.) on bsd
00:24 < RT|Chatzilla> I hacked owcc's types.h giving system-libc's defines, and
got logs:
http://roy.dnsd.me/build-linux-owcc.log
00:29 < RT|Chatzilla> the one I most noticed is owcc has its own vi
00:38 < lynx> haha its own vib> hi
bye,
//mirabilos
This log looks very similar to what I get (except that I had to suppress
a complaint about pwd.h).
BTW (off topic):
Since I started looking at mksh Build.sh again I decided to try to get
it to run nicely under Plan9/APE. My previous builds were always with a
custom mkfile, but I thought it would be nice to get it running "out of
the box" (more future-proof that way).
I picked up 2 problems immediately, which was that ape/cc does not
understand -O2 and -W... stuff. Because of this I will add a small test
under compiler "unknown" to set ct=plan9 if that is the TARGET_OS and
then add that one to the "do nothing" variant when it comes to add -O
and -W flags (that way, if one runs the build under Plan9 with the gcc
port, one should still be able to use fancy options).
For some strange reason ape/cc also chokes on this:
char ctasserts_dblcheck[sizeof(struct ctasserts) == NUM ? 1 : -1];
int main(void) { return (sizeof(ctasserts_dblcheck)); }
When I got it sorted out I will send a patch to the list. Is it OK if I
do the diff on R46 (the version I currently have extracted on my Plan9 VM)?
