Tom Evans writes:
> > Yup. The proof will be in the pudding, as they say.
>
> The proof of the pudding is in the eating, actually. There's no proof
> actually in the pudding.
>
>
Add some brandy, or maybe rum :-)
Makes the coding more fun. Maybe not faster or more
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 21:34 -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> Yup. The proof will be in the pudding, as they say.
>
> Warner
The proof of the pudding is in the eating, actually. There's no proof
actually in the pudding.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 03:03:44PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
>I bet a very large portion of those among us who are professional codes
>have had been forced at some time to port our make, whether it was the
>original pmake, or the up-to-date version (I did the most up to date I
>could manage.
I loo
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:02:17PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: > "David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > : On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:58:15AM +0100, R
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:02:17PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:58:15AM +0100, Rink Springer wrote:
> : > On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:17:30AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Warner Losh wrote:
> From: "Daniel O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Comments on pmake diffs for building on Linux
> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:01:28 +1030
>
>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:58:15AM +0100, Rink Springer wrote:
: > On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:17:30AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
: > > Solaris lacks TAILQ_xxx stuff too, so I would prefer something like
:
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > +#ifndef TAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER
: > +#define TAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(head) { NULL, &(head).tqh_first }
: > +#endif
: > +
: > +#ifndef TAILQ_
[ DO NOT REPLY TO MY PREVIOUS MESSAGE WITH THESE SAME CONTENTS
I GOOFED AND SET REPLY-TO freebsd-alpha !! ]
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 09:38:25PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2008-03-04 09:58, David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Lo
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 09:38:25PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2008-03-04 09:58, David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> >> #include "arch.h"
> >> +#include "config.h"
> >
> > Are you able to use "CFLAGS+= -include con
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> +#ifndef TAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER
> +#define TAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(head) { NULL, &(head).tqh_first }
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifndef TAILQ_FOREACH
> +#define TAILQ_FOREACH(var, head, field)
> \
> + f
On 2008-03-04 09:58, David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>> #include "arch.h"
>> +#include "config.h"
>
> Are you able to use "CFLAGS+= -include config.h" instead?
> If so, that would mean less .[ch] changes.
Not with Sun Stud
On 2008-03-04 10:01, David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:37:30PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > The next part, about the missing errx() functions on Solaris is going to
> > be tonight's fun. If there are too many missing functions, it may be
> > worth adding
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 11:04:07AM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> : > #include "arch.h"
> : > +#include "config.h"
> :
> : Are you able t
On 2008-03-04 09:56, David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:45:43PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > To test just cpp(1) stuff, autoconf supports AC_PREPROC_IFELSE() too,
> > which I used when I tried writing a check for __FBSDID():
>
> Why are you writing a check
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > #include "arch.h"
: > +#include "config.h"
:
: Are you able to use "CFLAGS+= -include config.h" instead?
: If so, that would mean less .[ch
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:37:30PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> The next part, about the missing errx() functions on Solaris is going to
> be tonight's fun. If there are too many missing functions, it may be
> worth adding a static `libcompat' with copies of just the functions we
> need to ru
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> #include "arch.h"
> +#include "config.h"
Are you able to use "CFLAGS+= -include config.h" instead?
If so, that would mean less .[ch] changes.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:45:43PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> To test just cpp(1) stuff, autoconf supports AC_PREPROC_IFELSE() too,
> which I used when I tried writing a check for __FBSDID():
Why are you writing a check for __FBSDID? Our sources so assume it
that IMnoHO you just need to pr
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 03:15:32PM +, Robert Watson wrote:
> In most ports of FreeBSD parts to Linux that I've seen, the preferred
> solution has to been to bring the entire FreeBSD queue.h with you
> rather than relying on the native Linux queue.h. This is what we do
> for OpenBSM, for exampl
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:58:15AM +0100, Rink Springer wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:17:30AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > Solaris lacks TAILQ_xxx stuff too, so I would prefer something like
> > "bsdcompat.h" or similar.
>
> Seconded - "linux.h" is far too generic. I must say I like t
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 10:42:56PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> here's a set of diffs that will allow FreeBSD's usr.bin/make to build
> on Linux. I'm sure they are gross, and I don't plan to commit them
> (at least not all of them), but I thought I'd post them here to see
> what people think.
T
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Harti Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: MWL>In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: MWL>Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: MWL>: On 2008-03-04 15:38, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
MWL>In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MWL>Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MWL>: On 2008-03-04 15:38, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
MWL>: > On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
MWL>: >
MWL>: >> : In most ports of Free
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On 2008-03-04 08:52, "M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: > Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > : Nice! Thank you Robert. Can I copy p
On 2008-03-04 15:45, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The next part, about the missing errx() functions on Solaris is going to
>> be tonight's fun. If there are too many missing functions, it may be
>> worth adding a static `libcompat' with copies of just the functions we
>> need to run
On 2008-03-04 08:52, "M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : Nice! Thank you Robert. Can I copy parts of this and add them to the
> : autoconf glue I'm adding now?
> :
> : To test just cpp(1) stu
On 2008-03-04 08:50, "M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : "arch.c", line 1063: undefined symbol: INT_MIN
> : cc: acomp failed for arch.c
> : *** Error code 2
> : make: Fatal error: Comma
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On 2008-03-04 15:38, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: >
: >> : In most ports of FreeBSD parts to Linux that I've seen, the preferred
solution
: >> : h
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On 2008-03-04 15:15, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: >> --- pmake.orig/config.h2005-02-01 03:50:35.0 -0700
: >> +++ pmake/config.h 2008-03
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: (When I say 'nice' above, I mean it in the normal autoconf sense of the word
: 'nice', so don't take that the wrong way!)
It would be nicer if it didn't use autoconf.
I hate to be a stick in the mud, but auto
On 2008-03-04 15:38, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>
>> : In most ports of FreeBSD parts to Linux that I've seen, the preferred
>> solution
>> : has to been to bring the entire FreeBSD queue.h with you rather than
>> relying
>> : on the nativ
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: > : In most ports of FreeBSD parts to Linux that I've seen, the preferred
solution
: > : has to been to bring the entire FreeBSD queue.h with you rather than
rely
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
In most ports of FreeBSD parts to Linux that I've seen, the preferred
solution has to been to bring the entire FreeBSD queue.h with you rather
than relying on the native Linux queue.h. This is what we do for OpenBSM,
for example; this also helps ou
On 2008-03-04 21:01, Girish Venkatachalam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 17:01:28 Mar 04, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>> I did this a while ago when porting some of our code to Linux because it
>> builds with pmake..
>>
>> Your patches are much nicer than mine however :)
>>
>> The tailq stuff could be s
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: In most ports of FreeBSD parts to Linux that I've seen, the preferred solution
: has to been to bring the entire FreeBSD queue.h with you rather than relying
: on the native Linux queue.h. This is what we do for OpenBSM, for example;
: this also helps
On 2008-03-04 15:15, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>> --- pmake.orig/config.h 2005-02-01 03:50:35.0 -0700
>> +++ pmake/config.h 2008-03-03 22:24:16.745493000 -0700
>> @@ -108,4 +108,27 @@
>> # endif
>> #endif
>>
>> +#ifndef TAILQ
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: > --- pmake.orig/config.h 2005-02-01 03:50:35.0 -0700
: > +++ pmake/config.h 2008-03-03 22:24:16.745493000 -0700
: > @@ -108,4 +108,27 @@
: > # endi
On 17:01:28 Mar 04, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> I did this a while ago when porting some of our code to Linux because it
> builds with pmake..
>
> Your patches are much nicer than mine however :)
>
> The tailq stuff could be shoved into a linux.h or some such.. So it's
> more obvious what it's
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
--- pmake.orig/config.h 2005-02-01 03:50:35.0 -0700
+++ pmake/config.h 2008-03-03 22:24:16.745493000 -0700
@@ -108,4 +108,27 @@
# endif
#endif
+#ifndef TAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER
+#define TAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(head) { NULL, &(head).tqh_first
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On 2008-03-03 22:42, "M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > Greetings,
: >
: > here's a set of diffs that will allow FreeBSD's usr.bin/make to build
: > on Linux. I'm sure they are gross, and I don
On 2008-03-03 22:42, "M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> here's a set of diffs that will allow FreeBSD's usr.bin/make to build
> on Linux. I'm sure they are gross, and I don't plan to commit them
> (at least not all of them), but I thought I'd post them here to see
> what
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > The tailq stuff could be shoved into a linux.h or some such.. So
> > it's more obvious what it's for and why it's there.
>
> Solaris lacks TAILQ_xxx stuff too, so I would prefer something like
> "bsdcompat.h" or similar.
Sounds good to me.
notfreeb
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:17:30AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> Solaris lacks TAILQ_xxx stuff too, so I would prefer something like
> "bsdcompat.h" or similar.
Seconded - "linux.h" is far too generic. I must say I like the idea
of being able to build *BSD on Linux machines!
--
Rink P.W. Spr
On 2008-03-04 17:01, Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > here's a set of diffs that will allow FreeBSD's usr.bin/make to build
> > on Linux. I'm sure they are gross, and I don't plan to commit them
> > (at least not all of t
From: "Daniel O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Comments on pmake diffs for building on Linux
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:01:28 +1030
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > here's a set of diffs that will allow Fre
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> here's a set of diffs that will allow FreeBSD's usr.bin/make to build
> on Linux. I'm sure they are gross, and I don't plan to commit them
> (at least not all of them), but I thought I'd post them here to see
> what people think.
>
> I thi
47 matches
Mail list logo
