From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <990207232642.ZM10052@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 23:26:42 -0800 In-Reply-To: <19990208064924.18981.qmail@hotmail.com> Comments: In reply to "Matt Armstrong" "PATCH zsh-3.1.5-pws-7: cygwin make fixes" (Feb 7, 10:49pm) References: <19990208064924.18981.qmail@hotmail.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.820 20aug96) To: "Matt Armstrong" , zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: PATCH zsh-3.1.5-pws-7: cygwin make fixes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailing-List: 5314 On Feb 7, 10:49pm, Matt Armstrong wrote: } Subject: PATCH zsh-3.1.5-pws-7: cygwin make fixes } } I fixed #2 by re-doing the way signames.c is created. Instead of a AWK } script that gets run on a signal.h file, a C program is compiled and } run. This gets it right even if the signal.h file is hard to parse. I haven't examined the patch in detail to check this, but did you make sure that the compilation of this program is performed in such a way that it executes correctly on the current hardware even when cross-compiling for another architecture? } My fix for #1 may be controversial because it may break for people who } need to keep using an older autoconf. Is upgrading a problem? It'd be better if it weren't necessary. Copy it into aczsh.m4 and give it a different name, e.g zsh_EXEEXT ? } My fix for #2, I think, is a good thing. ;-) I'd do the same thing for } the RLIMIT stuff if cygwin had RLIMIT stuff. It's not a good thing if it won't cross-compile. I didn't use to pay much attention to this, but I've just been through this particular plane of hell with procmail's build system (which even compiles and runs C programs to do sed-like substition on its man page templates!) so I'm feeling sensitive. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com