This year you changed make process and in meantime some workarounds
for OS/2-os2make376 were left off. Now Harbour under OS/2 does not
build with os2make376 and partially build with os2make381
We are currently discarding os2make376 and forcing to use
os2make381, and trying to find why and how to apply workarounds
Please be specific: What did I remove which broke 3.76?
Your choice of words if highly disappointing, after having
spent lots of time in OS/2 which I'm neither using, nor
overly interested in, nevertheless it's the most exotic and
difficult to work with platform of all. So I'm stopping to
deal with any sort of OS/2 issues from now on.
I've told this a few times, and we have in total two OS/2
users, so every minute invested in OS/2 looks like a dead
investment in a dead platform.
Sorry to be harsh, but if this is the reward to get to
support OS/2 users, I don't have better option than telling
such raw opinion.
Line "for %i in ( *.obj ) do @echo -+%i >> __lib__.tmp" are not in
SVN because is part of "local tests" to find solutions
I have reported many of these issues in my previous messages and
Przemek has explained many of the reasons also.
"install" and "clean" stages show a lot of errors. At this moment we
are trying to get a complete build of Harbour with workarounds and
without problems. Then we can concentrate in "install" and "clean"
Please be specific. What errors?
All I'm seeing is very difficult to track reports and claims.
For me it's extremely difficult to reassemble such puzzle from
these bits. Maybe a complete log with a known (intact) revision
would tell much more.
My proposal was simple:
If os2make381 have problems, and wmake.exe (OpenWatcom) with some
adjustments can do same process as os2make381, then we can discard
os2make381 and to use wmake.exe
I very strongly disagree with such move. We've chosen GNU
Make to be the only one make system to build Harbour and we
must stick to this goal.
You also seem to have ignored my other suggestions,
anyhow I'd still recommend to fix "what I broke" (possibly
intentionally!) regarding OS/2 GNU Make 3.76.
As you can see is not to introduce a parallel make process. Is to
use same structure of current GNUmake with proper adjustments
Below are some parts of Watcom Tools Guide related to wmake
Sorry, it's far enough to keep in mind ONE make syntax, it would
be a huge hit on development and efforts to keep track of TWO
syntaxes from now on. This is the thing I've been working against
since a lot of time, so I don't want to go reverse. I'd expect
such double compatibility wouldn't survive for too long unless
wmake is put into the test mix. For me the test mix is already
quite huge, and for me it's not an option to extend it with such
an exotic addition, since I find it a huge waste of time on the
wrong solution.
Brgds,
Viktor
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
