Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dennis Jones wrote: >The latest version of CVS (1.11.13) fails to build on Windows...again. If you'd like to volunteer to set up nightly testing on Windows for the CVS tree... >Building from the command line using NMAKE, results in the following er

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

Derek Robert Price writes: > > Now, are you _sure_ there is no equivalent to fcntl() under Windows? I > notice that both windows-nt/run.c and windows-nt/rcmd.c are including > . Are you certain there isn't just some library we're > neglecting to include or some other function name (like "_fcntl(

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

- Original Message - From: "Derek Robert Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dennis Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "CVS Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 11:03 AM Subject: Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Larry Jones wrote: >Derek Robert Price writes: > >>Now, are you _sure_ there is no equivalent to fcntl() under Windows? I >>notice that both windows-nt/run.c and windows-nt/rcmd.c are including >>. Are you certain there isn't just some library we're

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

: Sunday, February 15, 2004 11:03 AM >Subject: Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again > > >>Dennis Jones wrote: >> >>>The latest version of CVS (1.11.13) fails to build on Windows...again. >> >> >>If you'd like to volunteer to set up nightl

RE: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

Hi Derek, > From: Derek Robert Price > > I explaioned in another email to Larry. Still waiting to hear more > opinions on the importance of the error check I restored. I general, the more error checks be better say I!!! > >>Are you certain there isn't just some library we're > >>neglecting to

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

Derek Robert Price writes: > > It allowed me to check for unsent data in the buffer where the getc() > used to block with the wrong combination of client and server. Do you > not think this is worth it or do you have an alternative? Not only do I think it's not worth it, I think it's wrong. A l

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Larry Jones wrote: >Derek Robert Price writes: > >>It allowed me to check for unsent data in the buffer where the getc() >>used to block with the wrong combination of client and server. Do you >>not think this is worth it or do you have an alternativ

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Conrad T. Pino wrote: >Native Win32 handles don't have a blocking (synchronous) or (non-blocking) >asynchronous attribute/property/flag i.e. this mode is NOT chosen at file >open/create time. The choice is made when invoking the I/O operation by >usi

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

> >I only have Visual C++ 6.0 and various Borland C/C++ compilers. > >How much flexibility do we have deviating away from Visual C++ 5? > > > Well, fact of the matter is, I only have VC++ 6.0 too, so unless someone > who has VC++ 5.0 wants to help out, we'll have to drop support for VC++ 5.0. If

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dennis Jones wrote: >If you mean someone who will build the sources with VC++ 5.0, I have already >stated that I would be willing to automate building the CVS sources on a >nightly basis. Just send me the information on how to determine which >branch

RE: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

Derek Robert Price wrote: > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 11:43 PM > To: Conrad T. Pino > >I only have Visual C++ 6.0 and various Borland C/C++ compilers. > >How much flexibility do we have deviating away from Visual C++ 5? > > > Well, fact of the matter is, I only have VC++ 6.0 too, so > unle

Re: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim.Hyslop wrote: >Derek Robert Price wrote: > >>Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 11:43 PM >>To: Conrad T. Pino >> >>>I only have Visual C++ 6.0 and various Borland C/C++ compilers. >>>How much flexibility do we have deviating away from Visual C++ 5?

[Fwd: RE: Building CVS on Windows is broken...again]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Cross-posting in hopes of running this by more Windows experience... - Original Message Hi Derek, > From: Derek Robert Price [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > has > a