I've committed that part directly as it should be totally independent of
the immanent changes to the build system.
It cleans up some remaining cruft from the old days when assemble.pl
happened to be used.
More importantly there are now two different ways to run tests through
the PIR assembler:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > gmake: *** No rule to make target `languages/imcc/*.o', needed by
> > `languages/imcc/imcc'. Stop.
> Hmm... would it be possible/reasonable to do:
>IMCCSRCS = languages/imcc/*.c
>IMCCOBJS = $(IMCCSRCS:.c=.o
Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> > Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >
> > >> Attached is a minimum patch to build imcc as the parrot executable
> >
> > >languages/imcc/*.o
> >
>
At 3:57 PM +0100 7/1/03, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 10:04:41AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
The problem is that with a clean build tree, there are no *.o files
down in languages/imcc/ at the point when that target is reached.
Hence make doesn't have anything to expand *.o as,
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, as there are no problems reported, I've applied it.
Here is again a short summary:
> Attached is a minimum patch to build imcc as the parrot executable
> - renames orig parrot to test_main
> - renames imcc to parrot
> As the current build process ne
"Andy Dougherty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem is that with a clean build tree, there are no *.o files
> down in languages/imcc/ at the point when that target is reached.
> Hence make doesn't have anything to expand *.o as, and quite reasonably
> complains. If, however, there is even a
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 10:04:41AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> The problem is that with a clean build tree, there are no *.o files
> down in languages/imcc/ at the point when that target is reached.
> Hence make doesn't have anything to expand *.o as, and quite reasonably
> complains. If, howev
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> >> Attached is a minimum patch to build imcc as the parrot executable
>
> >languages/imcc/*.o
>
> > languages/imcc/*.o doesn't match anything
>
Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> Attached is a minimum patch to build imcc as the parrot executable
>languages/imcc/*.o
> languages/imcc/*.o doesn't match anything
Brain dead make? Anyway, this line could for sure be dele
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Attached is a minimum patch to build imcc as the parrot executable
> Please give it a try on other platforms, especially non Linux.
Sun's make failed with the following error:
make: Fatal error: Don't know how to make target `languages/imcc/*.o'
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #22855]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22855 >
Attached is a minimum patch to build imcc as the parrot executable
- renames orig par
Yep. Imcc should definitely move out off languages into its own subdir
under the top level (Not in the top level itself).
... Who should do this? I'd be willing to help if given direction.
Moving directories around in CVS is AFAIK a PITA. The last such
operation was done in the repository di
Josh Wilmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:40 on 06/01/2003 +0200, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yep. Imcc should definitely move out off languages into its own subdir
>> under the top level (Not in the top level itself).
> The problem is, if you're really going to do recursive
At 11:40 on 06/01/2003 +0200, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yep. Imcc should definitely move out off languages into its own subdir
> under the top level (Not in the top level itself).
>
> > ... Who should do
> > this? I'd be willing to help if given direction.
>
>
> Moving dir
Josh Wilmes wrote:
At 14:26 on 05/31/2003 EDT, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Honestly I'd prefer just a single executable, named
parrot,
I'm all for that as well. It would imply some code reorganization
(placing them in the same directory might make sense, or at least taking
imc
15 matches
Mail list logo