Never mind somehing seems to be wrong with RedHat patch executable. The same patch file work on on SGI.
Suhaib > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Suhaib M. > Siddiqi > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 11:41 AM > To: opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: RE: [opendx-dev] Which version number to use > > > Well, I got the patch from RedHat site: > > http://people.redhat.com/sopwith/opendx-misc.patch > > If I try to apply it to DX code retrieved from CVS yesterday. 99% of hunks > failed. > > I tried patch -p1 and patch -p0 options. I cannot get patches applied? > > So, what am i doing wrong? May be I forgot, over night, how to apply > patches ;-) > > Suhaib > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter Daniel > > Kirchner > > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 10:22 AM > > To: opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de > > Subject: Re: [opendx-dev] Which version number to use > > > > > > A couple of weeks ago I asked for tests of a large patch submitted from > > redhat. We heard back from Jeff with his partial OK, and that's > > it. I think > > these patches should go in and we should fix obvious breakage > > prior to 4.1 . > > Pete > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > I'm in. Any objections? > > > > > > BTW. I have a version that uses MS tools under the standard gnu build > > > structure ready for checkin. In addition to making lots of > code changes > > > for MS, I did wrappers for the MS compilers etc. that make them > > compatible > > > with the gnu tools, and have MSVC6 projects for everything. I > > think its a > > > necessary step before checking in the true Windows version of > > the exec that > > > doesn't require Exceed and supports the ActiveDX component stuff. > > > > > > So. Are we go for 4.1.0? > > > > > > Greg > > > > > > "Suhaib M. Siddiqi" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@opendx.watson.ibm.com on > > > 03/14/2000 07:43:30 AM > > > > > > Please respond to opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de > > > > > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > To: <opendx2-dev@lists.berlios.de> > > > cc: > > > Subject: [opendx-dev] Which version number to use > > > > > > Are we going to declare 4.0.10 are 4.1.0? > > > > > > I am trying to get OpenDx binaries compiled by using Exceed > XDK 6.2 and > > > MSVC > > > 6.0 > > > out of door. MSVC compilation requires a lot of manual > > editings, if we are > > > set on declaring 4.0.10 as 4.1.0 then I might bump the version > > number now, > > > instead of redoing it again. > > > After the release of Windows 2000 Microsoft SDK has a lot of > new headers > > > and it required a good amount of OpenDx 4.0.10 source patching. M$ is > > > about > > > to > > > release MSVC 7.0 which would have a lot of Win64 releated library and > > > header > > > changes again. > > > We would need to do a lot of patching again after MSVC 7.0 is > > released. It > > > may make binaries > > > unstable at that time. I prefer to see the DX version bumped > > now before we > > > get into another cycle of > > > unstable binaries due to changes in compilers and libraries. > > > > > > Suhaib >
