Hi,
This is an option. We opted not to call ld directly
for gcc compilers in general, but I think it's not a
problem to make an exception for OS/2.
Brgds,
Viktor
On 2010 Feb 19, at 11:29, Maurilio Longo wrote:
> David,
>
> Knut says gcc does not create a response file, but what happens if we
David,
Knut says gcc does not create a response file, but what happens if we call ld
or/and emxomfld directly, without passing through gcc, after having created
the correct response file?
We could end up with a solution which works with every version of gcc without
requiring a patch at all.
BTW,
Thanks David.
It confirms precisely what I suspected.
I hope someone can patch it the way described, it
will surely be great help for many projects, not
just Harbour. (like last time the nice cooperation
with GNU Make)
Brgds,
Viktor
On 2010 Feb 12, at 15:57, David Arturo Macias Corona wrote:
Viktor:
>It's also possible they parse the disk option file,
>convert it to string and pass it as plain command-line
>(with 32KB limit) to subprocess.
>While disk option files are not _only_ meant to get
>around cmdline length limitations, but this is one
>of their primary functions, so IMO this
It's also possible they parse the disk option file,
convert it to string and pass it as plain command-line
(with 32KB limit) to subprocess.
While disk option files are not _only_ meant to get
around cmdline length limitations, but this is one
of their primary functions, so IMO this is a bug in
Maurilio:
>I've reviewed your messages, I think 32K is environment size limit for
>OS/2 processes; so, maybe os2gcc and/or ld receive something as an
>envvar and this is now bigger than 32Kb :(
Thanks for your time and efforts
If what you say is true, then is a bad new
Solution may be to use te
David,
I've reviewed your messages, I think 32K is environment size limit for OS/2
processes; so, maybe os2gcc and/or ld receive something as an envvar and this
is now bigger than 32Kb :(
Maurilio.
David Arturo Macias Corona wrote:
> Maurilio:
>
>> this is something in gcc4 on OS/2, with my ol
Maurilio:
this is something in gcc4 on OS/2, with my old GCC 3.3.5 and latest
make I can build harbour.dll and harbourm.dll without problems.
Directory of E:\REPOSITORY\HARBOUR\bin\os2\gcc
11/02/10 13:41 3.866.628124 a--- harbour.dll
11/02/10 13:44 3.874.820124 a--- har
Maurilio:
>this is something in gcc4 on OS/2, with my old GCC 3.3.5 and latest
>make I can build harbour.dll and harbourm.dll without problems.
>Directory of E:\REPOSITORY\HARBOUR\bin\os2\gcc
>11/02/10 13:41 3.866.628124 a--- harbour.dll
>11/02/10 13:44 3.874.820124 a--- har
David,
this is something in gcc4 on OS/2, with my old GCC 3.3.5 and latest make I can
build harbour.dll and harbourm.dll without problems.
Directory of E:\REPOSITORY\HARBOUR\bin\os2\gcc
11/02/10 13:44 124 .
11/02/10 13:27 124 ..
11/02/10 13:41 3.866.628
Viktor:
>> - So os2gcc reach 32K limit again and harbourm.dll can not build
>:( I could be seen in advance. I can't give any solution,
>but I hope someone will.
As expected, Harbour has grown and can not fit in 32K limit :-)
>I'll suppress the libharu warnings.
Thanks
David Macias
___
Hi David,
On 2010 Feb 11, at 12:58, David Arturo Macias Corona wrote:
> I made tests with
> * $Id: ChangeLog 13841 2010-02-11 03:26:15Z jarabal $
> 2010-02-11 04:25 UTC+0100 Xavi (jarabal/at/gmail.com)
>
> and new os2gcc442
>
> - I saw there are new libraries in Harbour
> - So os2gcc reach 32K
I made tests with
* $Id: ChangeLog 13841 2010-02-11 03:26:15Z jarabal $
2010-02-11 04:25 UTC+0100 Xavi (jarabal/at/gmail.com)
and new os2gcc442
- I saw there are new libraries in Harbour
- So os2gcc reach 32K limit again and harbourm.dll can not build
Except for harbourm.dll build error, Harb
13 matches
Mail list logo
