Re: ltmain.m4sh patch for cwrappersource
* Christopher Hulbert wrote on Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 09:22:31PM CEST: On 4/3/07, Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for your patch. But really when porting to a w64 system (including a specific compiler and toolset), I'd prefer a reasonably complete port, at least including testsuite output and the like, so we can tell our users what to expect. I imagine it needs several more changes, at least for libltdl. What about without the _WIN64 defines? I can work around that. I've never had much luck running the testsuite. Why do you need luck to run the testsuite? Just run it verbosely as shown in README, post its output (but please pack with gzip or bzip2, and to the libtool-patches list only). We'll see to the rest then. Cheers, Ralf ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
ltmain.m4sh patch for cwrappersource
The attached patch allows compilers without unistd.h to generate
executables on windows 32 and 64-bit. This may not be the desired
version since it will be active on at least the MINGW host. On the
other hand, MINGW will support the code so it may not be a big deal.
Note: The relevant hunks of the patch are 2, 3, and 4.
Chris
Index: libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh
===
RCS file: /sources/libtool/libtool/libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh,v
retrieving revision 1.71
diff -u -r1.71 ltmain.m4sh
--- libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh 25 Mar 2007 12:12:42 - 1.71
+++ libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh 3 Apr 2007 18:29:55 -
@@ -5485,7 +5485,7 @@
# Create links to the real library.
for linkname in $linknames; do
- if test $realname != $linkname; then
+ if test $realname != $linkname ! -e $output_objdir/$linkname;then
func_show_eval '(cd $output_objdir $RM $linkname $LN_S $realname $linkname)' 'exit $?'
fi
done
@@ -5961,7 +5961,12 @@
cat $cwrappersourceEOF
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
-#include unistd.h
+#if defined(_WIN32) || defined(_WIN64)
+# include direct.h
+# define getcwd(a,b) _getcwd(a,b)
+#else
+# include unistd.h
+#endif
#include malloc.h
#include stdarg.h
#include assert.h
@@ -5982,8 +5987,8 @@
# define PATH_SEPARATOR ':'
#endif
-#if defined (_WIN32) || defined (__MSDOS__) || defined (__DJGPP__) || \
- defined (__OS2__)
+#if defined (_WIN32) || defined (_WIN64) || defined (__MSDOS__) || \
+ defined (__DJGPP__) || defined (__OS2__)
# define HAVE_DOS_BASED_FILE_SYSTEM
# ifndef DIR_SEPARATOR_2
# define DIR_SEPARATOR_2 '\\'
@@ -6134,7 +6139,11 @@
#if defined (S_IXGRP)
((st.st_mode S_IXGRP) == S_IXGRP) ||
#endif
+#if defined (S_IXUSR)
((st.st_mode S_IXUSR) == S_IXUSR))
+#else
+ 1)
+#endif
)
return 1;
else
@@ -6591,6 +6600,11 @@
do
last_oldobj=$obj
done
+ if test x$with_msvc_ld = xyes;then
+oldobjs= $last_oldobj
+func_show_eval $old_archive_cmds
+objlist= $oldlib
+ fi
for obj in $save_oldobjs
do
oldobjs=$objlist $obj
@@ -6607,7 +6621,11 @@
fi
test -z $concat_cmds || concat_cmds=$concat_cmds~
eval concat_cmds=\\${concat_cmds}$old_archive_cmds\
- objlist=
+ if test x$with_msvc_ld = xyes;then
+objlist= $oldlib
+ else
+objlist=
+ fi
fi
done
RANLIB=$save_RANLIB
Re: ltmain.m4sh patch for cwrappersource
Hello Christopher, * Christopher Hulbert wrote on Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:36:02PM CEST: The attached patch allows compilers without unistd.h to generate executables on windows 32 and 64-bit. This may not be the desired version since it will be active on at least the MINGW host. On the other hand, MINGW will support the code so it may not be a big deal. Thanks for your patch. But really when porting to a w64 system (including a specific compiler and toolset), I'd prefer a reasonably complete port, at least including testsuite output and the like, so we can tell our users what to expect. I imagine it needs several more changes, at least for libltdl. Cheers, Ralf
Re: ltmain.m4sh patch for cwrappersource
On 4/3/07, Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Christopher, * Christopher Hulbert wrote on Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:36:02PM CEST: The attached patch allows compilers without unistd.h to generate executables on windows 32 and 64-bit. This may not be the desired version since it will be active on at least the MINGW host. On the other hand, MINGW will support the code so it may not be a big deal. Thanks for your patch. But really when porting to a w64 system (including a specific compiler and toolset), I'd prefer a reasonably complete port, at least including testsuite output and the like, so we can tell our users what to expect. I imagine it needs several more changes, at least for libltdl. What about without the _WIN64 defines? I can work around that. I've never had much luck running the testsuite. Cheers, Ralf
ltmain.m4sh patch for cwrappersource
The attached patch allows compilers without unistd.h to generate
executables on windows 32 and 64-bit. This may not be the desired
version since it will be active on at least the MINGW host. On the
other hand, MINGW will support the code so it may not be a big deal.
Note: The relevant hunks of the patch are 2, 3, and 4.
Chris
Index: libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh
===
RCS file: /sources/libtool/libtool/libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh,v
retrieving revision 1.71
diff -u -r1.71 ltmain.m4sh
--- libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh 25 Mar 2007 12:12:42 - 1.71
+++ libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh 3 Apr 2007 18:29:55 -
@@ -5485,7 +5485,7 @@
# Create links to the real library.
for linkname in $linknames; do
- if test $realname != $linkname; then
+ if test $realname != $linkname ! -e $output_objdir/$linkname;then
func_show_eval '(cd $output_objdir $RM $linkname $LN_S $realname $linkname)' 'exit $?'
fi
done
@@ -5961,7 +5961,12 @@
cat $cwrappersourceEOF
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
-#include unistd.h
+#if defined(_WIN32) || defined(_WIN64)
+# include direct.h
+# define getcwd(a,b) _getcwd(a,b)
+#else
+# include unistd.h
+#endif
#include malloc.h
#include stdarg.h
#include assert.h
@@ -5982,8 +5987,8 @@
# define PATH_SEPARATOR ':'
#endif
-#if defined (_WIN32) || defined (__MSDOS__) || defined (__DJGPP__) || \
- defined (__OS2__)
+#if defined (_WIN32) || defined (_WIN64) || defined (__MSDOS__) || \
+ defined (__DJGPP__) || defined (__OS2__)
# define HAVE_DOS_BASED_FILE_SYSTEM
# ifndef DIR_SEPARATOR_2
# define DIR_SEPARATOR_2 '\\'
@@ -6134,7 +6139,11 @@
#if defined (S_IXGRP)
((st.st_mode S_IXGRP) == S_IXGRP) ||
#endif
+#if defined (S_IXUSR)
((st.st_mode S_IXUSR) == S_IXUSR))
+#else
+ 1)
+#endif
)
return 1;
else
@@ -6591,6 +6600,11 @@
do
last_oldobj=$obj
done
+ if test x$with_msvc_ld = xyes;then
+oldobjs= $last_oldobj
+func_show_eval $old_archive_cmds
+objlist= $oldlib
+ fi
for obj in $save_oldobjs
do
oldobjs=$objlist $obj
@@ -6607,7 +6621,11 @@
fi
test -z $concat_cmds || concat_cmds=$concat_cmds~
eval concat_cmds=\\${concat_cmds}$old_archive_cmds\
- objlist=
+ if test x$with_msvc_ld = xyes;then
+objlist= $oldlib
+ else
+objlist=
+ fi
fi
done
RANLIB=$save_RANLIB
___
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: ltmain.m4sh patch for cwrappersource
Hello Christopher, * Christopher Hulbert wrote on Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:36:02PM CEST: The attached patch allows compilers without unistd.h to generate executables on windows 32 and 64-bit. This may not be the desired version since it will be active on at least the MINGW host. On the other hand, MINGW will support the code so it may not be a big deal. Thanks for your patch. But really when porting to a w64 system (including a specific compiler and toolset), I'd prefer a reasonably complete port, at least including testsuite output and the like, so we can tell our users what to expect. I imagine it needs several more changes, at least for libltdl. Cheers, Ralf ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: ltmain.m4sh patch for cwrappersource
On 4/3/07, Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Christopher, * Christopher Hulbert wrote on Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:36:02PM CEST: The attached patch allows compilers without unistd.h to generate executables on windows 32 and 64-bit. This may not be the desired version since it will be active on at least the MINGW host. On the other hand, MINGW will support the code so it may not be a big deal. Thanks for your patch. But really when porting to a w64 system (including a specific compiler and toolset), I'd prefer a reasonably complete port, at least including testsuite output and the like, so we can tell our users what to expect. I imagine it needs several more changes, at least for libltdl. What about without the _WIN64 defines? I can work around that. I've never had much luck running the testsuite. Cheers, Ralf ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
