Jens Staal dixit: > sure you can do that. I just thought this to be a bit too "fringe" to actually > be of general interest.
OK, will do. You’ll find that “the mksh crowd” actually lives on such “fringe” things. There are Plan 9 people, Minix (pre-Minix3) people, suckless.org people, Haiku, Syllable, Hurd, OSF/1, ULTRIX, and lots more here. >> Jens Staal dixit: >> >>> Naturally curious as I am, I started to play with trying to compile mksh >>> with >>> openwatcom on Linux (Arch x86_64) - mostly due to nostalgia with all the >>> Dos4GW >> >> Oh, Watcom now exists for Linux? Do you have any further information >> on that (does it come with source; is it even Open Source; does it >> exist in Debian, is it portable to MirBSD, what (CPU) architectures >> are supported)? > > The official version is handled by perfoce, which is somewhat annoying, but > source tarballs are available along with x86/x86_64 Linux binaries. Hm, interesting. > http://www.openwatcom.org/index.php/Downloads I’ll have a look at it (and will peek at getting it to work on BSD). > There is also a github mirror/fork > https://github.com/open-watcom > > but I failed building that one... Typical… ;-) > Just realized that setting CC=owcc instead of CC=wc386 makes a lot of the > tests > work. The compiler driver should behave cc-like enough, yes. I think we noted that $somewhere, but once you got a bit farther I can really put it on the homepage. > Stuff I do need to try to figure out is whether I need to > define some other stuff like AR, RANLIB or similar (I also played with trying > to build suckless.org sbase (aiming for small stuff with no external > dependencies) and got as far as the "util.a" library but could not link it to > make a binary - got errorcodes that are "ungoogleable"). Off-topic, but you may put a follow-up posting to this one to the mailing list (with a subject change, and do a separate follow-up without the subject change for continuing the mksh discussion, please), in case someone’s got an idea – IRC is also usually a good bet. > apparently just doing "touch pwd.h" is enough to pass that test. So <pwd.h> should be made optional? That’s not a problem. > At the moment is stops at: […] > sh.h(701): Error! E1022: Missing or misspelled data type near 'sigjmp_buf' > sh.h(983): Error! E1022: Missing or misspelled data type near 'sigset_t' Okay, you definitely need sigsetjmp() which pulls in sigjmp_buf (if and precisely if your _setjmp() or setjmp() has sigsetjmp()-like behaviour, we can get along with it, but if it’s got setjmp()-like only, we can’t). And sigset_t is used by/with sigsuspend() and sigprocmask() and friends, which is absolutely necessary for job control and things like that. > heh well the openwatcom is out there... I am mostly curious to see > how well the resulting binaries will perform ;) And whether at all, indeed ;) Good luck! bye, //mirabilos -- 17:08⎜«Vutral» früher gabs keine packenden smartphones und so 17:08⎜«Vutral» heute gibts frauen die sind facebooksüchtig 17:10⎜«Vutral» aber auch traurig; früher warst du als nerd voll am arsch 17:10⎜«Vutral» heute bist du als nerd der einzige der wirklich damit klarkommt
