From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jun 14 04:58:36 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA11228 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:58:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wdl1.wdl.loral.com (wdl1.wdl.loral.com [137.249.32.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA11222 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from miles.sso.loral.com (miles.wdl.loral.com) by wdl1.wdl.loral.com (5.x/WDL-2.4-1.0) id AA09326; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:57:59 -0700 Received: by miles.sso.loral.com (4.1/SSO-SUN-2.04) id AA06187; Fri, 14 Jun 96 07:56:10 EDT Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 07:56:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard Toren X-Sender: rpt@miles To: Brandon Gillespie Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Compiling 'UPS' in FreeBSD.. In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Brandon; I think you are as stuck as I am. Back when I got my first FreeBSD release (2.0R) I tried and failed to get 2.45 to compile. At that time the problem was that the structures in the kernel and core file weren't the same as NetBsd(?). I tried for a month of so to get someone who was familiar with the internals to take a look at it without a single response. I also had patches to UPS that did C++ and we had used it for 2 years on a commercial project because it was so much better than ObjectCenter at the time. I have new patches to the 3.14 version for C++, but use them only on our Solaris machines. I haven't tried UPS 3.14 on FBSD since I expected just the problem you are having. Sorry.... ==================================================== Rip Toren | The bad news is that C++ is not an object-oriented | rpt@miles.sso.loral.com | programming language. .... The good news is that | | C++ supports object-oriented programming. | | C++ Programming & Fundamental Concepts | | by Anderson & Heinze | ==================================================== On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, Brandon Gillespie wrote: > Ok, I've grabbed the latest ups source and attempted to compile it. I > have managed to get it to the point of linking, at which point it bombs > when trying to link to certain functions (which it 'in theory' defines). > As I've reached whits end this evening I'm wondering if anybody else has > attempted to compile it (successfully or no). There was a few problems > of searched directories (fixed in the Makefile), a problem where a > #define somewhere outside of the ups code of 'DT_UNKNOWN' was conflicing > with an enum, and another problem where it did a simple test for BSD and > then attempted to #include . > > Thanks for any help rendered.. > > -Brandon Gillespie (he who is tired of not having a nice debugger)- >