Re: [9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Greg Comeau wrote: > In article , > Fernan Bolando wrote: >>just curious is it normal for 8l to follow some sort of precendence >>based on the commandline? this being done through ape/pcc >> >>this is unable to build >>8l -o spice -v /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libap.a >> >>this was able to build >>8l -o spice -v spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a /386/lib/ape/libap.a >>... > > 8l requires it to be mentioned/presented in order, and once it > moves on from a library, requires still needed libraries to be repeatedly > mentioned/presented even if "the same library" was already mentioned > previously. As per 8l "When scanning such libraries, the algorithm is > to scan each library repeatedly until no new undefined symbols are picked up, > then to start on the next library. Thus if library A needs B which > needs A again, it may be necessary to mention A explicitly so it will > be read a second time." So your problem lib is probably having put > libf2c.a first. > -- yes, that was the problem after Charles pointed out to re-read the manual. I did read it before posting :) my English comprehension is probably sub par. I seem to remember being able to place all the object files in whatever order before, I guess this is the first time I actually hit this so now i know. thank you all
Re: [9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
>and 8l will sort it out. by which i meant: you then don't name any libraries at all, since 8l will pick up the names from the references in the include files. and therefore, as well as not having to name libf2c.a, > you shouldn't need to mention libap.a,
Re: [9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
the solution is to add #pragma lib "/$M/lib/ape/libf2c.a" to the include file that f2c's generated code uses, and 8l will sort it out. you shouldn't need to mention libap.a, either, since something should be including an ape include file (and those have the #pragma libs)
Re: [9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
In article , Fernan Bolando wrote: >just curious is it normal for 8l to follow some sort of precendence >based on the commandline? this being done through ape/pcc > >this is unable to build >8l -o spice -v /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libap.a > >this was able to build >8l -o spice -v spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a /386/lib/ape/libap.a >... 8l requires it to be mentioned/presented in order, and once it moves on from a library, requires still needed libraries to be repeatedly mentioned/presented even if "the same library" was already mentioned previously. As per 8l "When scanning such libraries, the algorithm is to scan each library repeatedly until no new undefined symbols are picked up, then to start on the next library. Thus if library A needs B which needs A again, it may be necessary to mention A explicitly so it will be read a second time." So your problem lib is probably having put libf2c.a first. -- Greg Comeau / 4.3.10.1 with C++0xisms now in beta! Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90. Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?
Re: [9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:41 -0800, "Rob Pike" wrote: > someone should move those pages and all links from 2 to 8. There's no problem accessing any ?l page with man(1), unless it's grown a bug since I last pulled. I assume the problem is with web man indexes? If so, shouldn't the indexing be fixed? I mean if we move them all to 8, what about 5l or vl?
Re: [9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
someone should move those pages and all links from 2 to 8. -rob
Re: [9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
>just curious is it normal for 8l to follow some sort of precendence >based on the commandline? this being done through ape/pcc it seems fairly logical; the procedure is somewhat unsportingly documented in man page 2l(1).
[9fans] 8l follows a precedence based on the commandline arrangement
just curious is it normal for 8l to follow some sort of precendence based on the commandline? this being done through ape/pcc this is unable to build 8l -o spice -v /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libap.a this was able to build 8l -o spice -v spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a /386/lib/ape/libap.a the listing below is a longer snippet of what happend. --- Failed linking 8l -o spice -v /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libap.a 0.20 mkfwd 0.20 patch MAIN__: iargc_ is undefined MAIN__: s_wsfe is undefined MAIN__: e_wsfe is undefined MAIN__: do_fio is undefined MAIN__: s_stop is undefined magphs_: r_imag is undefined card_: d_sign is undefined getlin_: s_rsfe is undefined getlin_: e_rsfe is undefined disto_: r_cnjg is undefined disto_: d_lg10 is undefined _main: main is undefined 0.21 follow 0.22 dodata 0.23 span 0.24 span 1 0.24 span 2 0.25 span 3 0.25 span 0.26 span 4 etext = 554fb 0.26 asmb 0.27 datblk 0.28 sym symsize = 155027 0.28 sp 0.28 pc lcsize = 42324 0.28 headr sigsetjmp: xargc: not defined sigsetjmp: xargv: not defined 0.28 cpu time 5051 symbols 750 memory used 16 sizeof adr 60 sizeof prog pcc: 8l: 8l 5466: error successful link 8l -o spice -v spice.8 unix.8 /386/lib/ape/libf2c.a /386/lib/ape/libap.a 0.24 mkfwd 0.25 patch 0.25 follow 0.27 dodata 0.27 span 0.28 span 1 0.29 span 2 0.29 span 3 0.30 span 0.31 span 4 etext = 5c77e 0.31 asmb 0.34 datblk 0.34 sym symsize = 198845 0.34 sp 0.34 pc lcsize = 46938 0.34 headr 0.35 cpu time 5236 symbols 1000 memory used 16 sizeof adr 60 sizeof prog
