Re: [Oorexx-devel] Question about ooRexx Linux build machine

> > I thought there was some ooRexx VM server that David used to run. Did that > end up going away? > When David left as ooRexx dev, he took the box with him to his new Redhat engagement So I best just do my own thing in VirtualBox on my own system? > Even if you machine isn't online 24x7, it may

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Another, maybe interesting observation

Is there anything I could do to provide information that could help solve this problem, or is enough already known? ---rony On 22.02.2017 15:48, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > > On 22.02.2017 15:44, Rick McGuire wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Rony G. Flatscher

Re: [Oorexx-devel] LinuxOne build up and running again

> > SLES on their LinuxONE mainframe .. accessible through the build machine > at http://build.oorexx.org . > René, very good news! Thanks! I see that a few testcases fail, so there is work to do. > The failing test cases have already been fixed yesterday. I just re-ran the tests on the Z

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Another, maybe interesting observation

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > O.K., this may be a little bit weird: I can manage to have the test code > run without an exception, repeatedly! > Background: in the native code I have many, many output statements to > stderr for debugging

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Another, maybe interesting observation

On 22.02.2017 15:40, Rick McGuire wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Rony G. Flatscher > wrote: > > O.K., this may be a little bit weird: I can manage to have the test code > run without an > exception, repeatedly! > >

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Another, maybe interesting observation

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > O.K., this may be a little bit weird: I can manage to have the test code > run without an exception, repeatedly! > Background: in the native code I have many, many output statements to > stderr for debugging

[Oorexx-devel] Another, maybe interesting observation

O.K., this may be a little bit weird: I can manage to have the test code run without an exception, repeatedly! Background: in the native code I have many, many output statements to stderr for debugging (tons over the years, controlled by defines) in the form of, e.g: fprintf(stderr,

[Oorexx-devel] LinuxOne build up and running again

Things with IBM did not work out (I was trying to get a non-expiring small business VM with Linux (SLES) on Z) (they stopped answering). But: I am happy to announce that the ooRexx for Linux on Z is up and running again due to a gracious donation of ICU-IT.NL, which has granted RexxLA use of a

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Question ad GetAllContextVariables()

On 22.02.2017 12:38, Rick McGuire wrote: > I doubt that would be the source of the problem, but you do realize you can > retrieve the context > variables without calling an external function? Yes, via .context~variables. In this case (for orthogonality) the external Rexx function

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Question ad GetAllContextVariables()

I doubt that would be the source of the problem, but you do realize you can retrieve the context variables without calling an external function? Rick On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > While going thru the code I "stumbled" over the "excessive"

[Oorexx-devel] Question ad GetAllContextVariables()

While going thru the code I "stumbled" over the "excessive" use of GetAllContextVariables(). There is an external Rexx function in BSF4ooRexx that uses that API and immediately returns the directory it gets from GetAllContextVariables(). So I was wondering, whether it makes sense to look into

[Oorexx-devel] Tuesday (Re: Now thread about debugging this

Went again thru the BSF4ooRexx code. Have not found anything, however a few observations: * When doing a RequestGlobalReference() on the argument array *and* its sole entry, then the program ran to the end without a problem. * Adding additional output statements (that also caused more

Re: [Oorexx-devel] sourceforge down

On 21.02.2017 19:04, Chip Davis wrote: > It appears that Rony works so hard, he's vaulted himself more than a > week ahead of the rest of us. :-)) 8) [Well, the last weeks were a little bit ... exhaustive, 7 days, 12-14 hours...] > > On 2/21/2017 3:35 AM, René Jansen wrote: >> Thanks Rony. I