June 2001 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: configure.in patch

by Bang Jun-Young

On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:42:07AM +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:43:55PM +0900, Bang Jun-Young wrote: > > Why does configure check for flex twice? On NetBSD I get: > > > > checking for bison... no > > checking for byacc... no > > checking for flex... flex > > checking for yywrap in -lfl... yes > > checking for flex... flex > > > > (as seen above, autoconf doesn't search for `yacc' for > > AC_PROG_YACC -- should be fixed) > > It will use it as default if neither byacc nor flex are found. > > The reason we check for 'flex' again is that the standard check sets LEX > to 'lex' even if none is found, which lead to confusion during compile. > > Our check is similar, but it finds out if 'lex' is present and aborts > configure if not. Another question: why doesn't it doublecheck for yacc? There may be a system that doesn't have any parser installed by default and at least one of yacc, byacc, and bison should be installed to compile. I have made another patch: diff -u -r1.209 configure.in --- configure.in 2001/06/19 03:30:14 1.209 +++ configure.in 2001/06/26 11:26:50 @@ -54,6 +54,13 @@ AC_PROG_CPP AC_PATH_XTRA AC_PROG_YACC +AC_CHECK_PROGS(XYACC,$YACC yacc byacc bison,none) +if test "$XYACC" = "none" +then + echo "*** Error: No suitable parser found. ***" + echo " Please install 'yacc', 'byacc', or 'bison' package." + exit 1 +fi AC_PROG_LEX AC_CHECK_PROGS(XLEX,$LEX flex lex,none) if test "$XLEX" = "none" Jun-Young -- Bang Jun-Young <bjy(a)mogua.org>

June 26, 2001

Re: configure.in patch

by Andreas Mohr

On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:42:07AM +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:43:55PM +0900, Bang Jun-Young wrote: > > Why does configure check for flex twice? On NetBSD I get: > > > > checking for bison... no > > checking for byacc... no > > checking for flex... flex > > checking for yywrap in -lfl... yes > > checking for flex... flex > > > > (as seen above, autoconf doesn't search for `yacc' for > > AC_PROG_YACC -- should be fixed) > > It will use it as default if neither byacc nor flex are found. > > The reason we check for 'flex' again is that the standard check sets LEX > to 'lex' even if none is found, which lead to confusion during compile. > > Our check is similar, but it finds out if 'lex' is present and aborts > configure if not. > > This has reduced compiling support queries :) That's all fine and dandy :), but I think we should add a comment to this configure.in line, given the pretty confusing doubled configure output. I'm about 150% sure other people will want to submit the same "fixes" otherwise. -- Andreas Mohr

June 26, 2001

Re: configure.in patch

by Marcus Meissner

On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:43:55PM +0900, Bang Jun-Young wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 08:44:50AM +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 03:34:23PM +0900, Bang Jun-Young wrote: > > > * configure.in: > > > Remove a redundant check for flex. > > > > It is not redundant! AC_PROG_LEX does more than just look for the 'lex' > > binary. > > > > Please do not apply. > > Why does configure check for flex twice? On NetBSD I get: > > checking for bison... no > checking for byacc... no > checking for flex... flex > checking for yywrap in -lfl... yes > checking for flex... flex > > (as seen above, autoconf doesn't search for `yacc' for > AC_PROG_YACC -- should be fixed) It will use it as default if neither byacc nor flex are found. The reason we check for 'flex' again is that the standard check sets LEX to 'lex' even if none is found, which lead to confusion during compile. Our check is similar, but it finds out if 'lex' is present and aborts configure if not. This has reduced compiling support queries :) Ciao, Marcus

June 26, 2001

Re: Apps DB round 2

by G.LeeJ

James Hatheway wrote: > > > Proposals: > > > * Currently the screenshot is in its own column. That's quite bad > > > sometimes: > > > > I'll play with this some more. I'm assuming a web design that the average > > user is going to be at 1024x768. Does anyone really use less than that > > anymore? (save for web devices of course). > > Yes, unfortunately... Many public places like libraries,etc. still > have terminals with 15 inch monitors at 800x600. agreed......alot of people are simply in a upper crust minority with screens as large as 1024x768 and able to read that res without "squinting" terribly......ie:at "least" a 19" monitor and those aren't cheap for average consumer...although Ihaven't checked prices recently my 21" hitachi is totally adequate ....... I NEVER design without taking into consideration 15"/800X600......because the outcome can be plain nasty. signed minority member <g>

June 26, 2001

Re: configure.in patch

by Bang Jun-Young

On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 08:44:50AM +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 03:34:23PM +0900, Bang Jun-Young wrote: > > * configure.in: > > Remove a redundant check for flex. > > It is not redundant! AC_PROG_LEX does more than just look for the 'lex' > binary. > > Please do not apply. Why does configure check for flex twice? On NetBSD I get: checking for bison... no checking for byacc... no checking for flex... flex checking for yywrap in -lfl... yes checking for flex... flex (as seen above, autoconf doesn't search for `yacc' for AC_PROG_YACC -- should be fixed) Jun-Young -- Bang Jun-Young <bjy(a)mogua.org>

June 26, 2001

Re: configure.in patch

by Marcus Meissner

On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 03:34:23PM +0900, Bang Jun-Young wrote: > * configure.in: > Remove a redundant check for flex. It is not redundant! AC_PROG_LEX does more than just look for the 'lex' binary. Please do not apply. Ciao, Marcus > -AC_PROG_LEX > AC_CHECK_PROGS(XLEX,$LEX flex lex,none) > if test "$XLEX" = "none" > then

June 26, 2001

RE: undefined reference to main in _start

by lawson_whitney＠juno.com

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Gilroy Billard wrote: > No, it is not. > > Basically, I want to use wine_main and link the WINE source libraries into > my project, for example, libmsvfw32.so, libwine.so, etc. > This is what I did in the past and it worked fairly well. However, 20001202 > and greater versions of WINE also require libntdll.so. This is fine too, but > now I get an error "crt1.o undefined reference to main in _start". > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Gouget [mailto:fgouget(a)free.fr] > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 3:12 PM > To: Gilroy Billard > Cc: Uwe Bonnes; Wine-Devel(a)Winehq.Com > Subject: RE: undefined reference to main in _start > > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Gilroy Billard wrote: > > > winemaker? no I didn't know there was such a thing. I will take a look at > > it though. thanks > > Winemaker generates Makefiles to compile windows source with Winelib. > But I don't think this is what you want to do, is it? > > > -- > Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ > We are Pentium of Borg. You will be approximated. Division is futile. > Maybe I am misunderstanding something, but that sounds like a winelib application you are working on, and that is what winemaker does best, in my experience. Don't be mislead by "windows source", think rather "c-like code you have the source to that wants to make some calls to the windows API" (it can also call any other API you care to give it the headers and libraries for, including libc). Winelib programs changed radically some time in December 2000 - I think for the better - in that you can now simply import a dll in the .spec file and the wine toolchain starting with winemaker takes care of LoadLibrary/GetProcAddress, but they build, start and link differently too. I'd say give winemaker a try. Maybe you will have to hand-hack the Makefile a bit, but winemaker understands beter than I can explain how to make winelib apps. I guess you could take winedbg as an example winelib app. Lawson --- Just because it works for me, doesn't mean I know what I'm doing. ---cut here--- ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

June 25, 2001

Re: Win16 calls by Win32 functions

by Alexandre Julliard

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > Sure Win32 calls to Win16 should be eliminated that is > without question. This is how Windows NT does it and > Alexandre has a policy that Wine should doing like > Windows NT does. I fully agree. > > However I'm not positive that replacing Win16 calls to > Win16 with Win32 calls is always good idea. See below. As a rule it is a good idea, but there are of course exceptions. Basically the rule should be that wherever you can choose between a Win16 or Win32 function to do something, you should pick the Win32 function. But in the cases where the Win16 and Win32 functions have different semantics, then of course you have to use the correct one, even if in some cases it means calling Win16 functions from Win32 (like for the GlobalAlloc stuff). -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

June 25, 2001

RE: undefined reference to main in _start

by Gilroy Billard

No, it is not. Basically, I want to use wine_main and link the WINE source libraries into my project, for example, libmsvfw32.so, libwine.so, etc. This is what I did in the past and it worked fairly well. However, 20001202 and greater versions of WINE also require libntdll.so. This is fine too, but now I get an error "crt1.o undefined reference to main in _start". -----Original Message----- From: Francois Gouget [mailto:fgouget(a)free.fr] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 3:12 PM To: Gilroy Billard Cc: Uwe Bonnes; Wine-Devel(a)Winehq.Com Subject: RE: undefined reference to main in _start On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Gilroy Billard wrote: > winemaker? no I didn't know there was such a thing. I will take a look at > it though. thanks Winemaker generates Makefiles to compile windows source with Winelib. But I don't think this is what you want to do, is it? -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ We are Pentium of Borg. You will be approximated. Division is futile.

June 25, 2001

RE: undefined reference to main in _start

by Francois Gouget

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Gilroy Billard wrote: > winemaker? no I didn't know there was such a thing. I will take a look at > it though. thanks Winemaker generates Makefiles to compile windows source with Winelib. But I don't think this is what you want to do, is it? -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ We are Pentium of Borg. You will be approximated. Division is futile.

June 25, 2001