I agree, too. OK, I'd like to suggest that we do a little sanity checking just to make sure we are not missing anything obvious. It looks like Jiten's nightly builds are running smoothly on DEC 4.0, AIX 4.3.2 w/ xlc, and Linux/RH6.1. I'll run a clean build on SGI/IRIX6.2, and run a couple tests on each of these. Sounds like Suhaib has cygwin under control. Can anyone else report on a recent clean cvs build? Anyone willing to build and run on other platforms over the next couple days? I'd be happy if we could just run a couple samples on as wide an array of platforms as we can, but let's set a limit so this doesn't drag on too much. Friday?
Greg "Suhaib M. Siddiqi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@opendx.watson.ibm.com on 03/14/2000 12:56:34 PM Please respond to opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de> cc: Subject: RE: [opendx-dev] Which version number to use I abolsutely agree with David. I think it is better to declare 4.0.10 from yesterday CVS as 4.1.0. It is stable, then introduce other changes like MSVC and the patch from RedHat and work to fix new bugs. Suhaib > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David L. > Thompson > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 12:41 PM > To: opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: Re: [opendx-dev] Which version number to use > > > I question this patch before the bump. We've seen stable builds with > what we have now. I started to perform a lot of the same stuff they > did at Redhat, and found that at times things destabilized. I'd > rather get 4.1.0 out with what we have, get the readmes, etc that > we're supposed to add and then do the bump. Past that, then apply all > these patches and start working on an odd number revision again. I > have a lot more to add than just the changing the return NULLs to > return ERRORs. Basically they just cleaned up some minor compiler > errors. > > David > > >A couple of weeks ago I asked for tests of a large patch submitted from > >redhat. We heard back from Jeff with his partial OK, and that's > it. I think > >these patches should go in and we should fix obvious breakage > prior to 4.1 . > >Pete > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> I'm in. Any objections? > >> > >> BTW. I have a version that uses MS tools under the standard gnu build > >> structure ready for checkin. In addition to making lots of > code changes > >> for MS, I did wrappers for the MS compilers etc. that make > them compatible > >> with the gnu tools, and have MSVC6 projects for everything. > I think its a > >> necessary step before checking in the true Windows version of > the exec that > >> doesn't require Exceed and supports the ActiveDX component stuff. > >> > >> So. Are we go for 4.1.0? > >> > >> Greg > >> > >> "Suhaib M. Siddiqi" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@opendx.watson.ibm.com on > >> 03/14/2000 07:43:30 AM > >> > >> Please respond to opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de > >> > >> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> To: <opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de> > >> cc: > >> Subject: [opendx-dev] Which version number to use > >> > >> Are we going to declare 4.0.10 are 4.1.0? > >> > >> I am trying to get OpenDx binaries compiled by using Exceed > XDK 6.2 and > >> MSVC > >> 6.0 > >> out of door. MSVC compilation requires a lot of manual > editings, if we are > >> set on declaring 4.0.10 as 4.1.0 then I might bump the > version number now, > >> instead of redoing it again. > >> After the release of Windows 2000 Microsoft SDK has a lot of > new headers > >> and it required a good amount of OpenDx 4.0.10 source patching. M$ is > >> about > >> to > >> release MSVC 7.0 which would have a lot of Win64 releated library and > >> header > >> changes again. > >> We would need to do a lot of patching again after MSVC 7.0 is > released. It > >> may make binaries > >> unstable at that time. I prefer to see the DX version bumped > now before we > >> get into another cycle of > >> unstable binaries due to changes in compilers and libraries. > >> > >> Suhaib > > -- > .................................................................. > ........... > David L. Thompson The University of Montana > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Computer Science Department > http://www.cs.umt.edu/u/dthompsn Missoula, MT 59812 > Work Phone : (406)257-8530
