crunch@well.UUCP (John Draper) (12/10/86)
#! /bin/sh
# This is a shell archive, meaning:
# 1. Remove everything above the #! /bin/sh line.
# 2. Save the resulting text in a file.
# 3. Execute the file with /bin/sh (not csh) to create:
# makefile
# head.h
# This archive created: Tue Dec 9 22:18:18 1986
export PATH; PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:$PATH
if test -f 'makefile'
then
echo shar: "will not over-write existing file 'makefile'"
else
cat << \SHAR_EOF > 'makefile'
CFLAGS=+igt.dmp -l100 -Z6000
ALL=addgad.o dispgad.o filemenu.o gadio.o EGad.o imagdcl.o\
imagfunc.o imagimag.o image.o imagout.o kp.o men.o\
menstructs.o misc.o mp.o pgad.o reqn.o utilmen.o \
itextdcl.o itexted.o
all: $(ALL)
ln -o EGad +cdb -w $(ALL) -lc -lm
gt.dmp:
cc +hgt.dmp -a +D +l head.h
SHAR_EOF
fi
if test -f 'head.h'
then
echo shar: "will not over-write existing file 'head.h'"
else
cat << \SHAR_EOF > 'head.h'
/* The usual header files to be inserted later */
#include <intuition/intuition.h>
#include <libraries/dosextens.h>
#include <graphics/gfxbase.h>
#include <graphics/gfx.h>
#include <graphics/display.h>
#include <exec/memory.h>
#include <workbench/workbench.h>
#include <workbench/startup.h>
#include <devices/narrator.h>
#include <devices/audio.h>
#include <libraries/translator.h>
#include "gad.h"
SHAR_EOF
fi
exit 0
# End of shell archivepapa@bacall.UUCP (Marco Papa) (12/11/86)
John, 4 files didn't make it here: imagimag.c, imag.c, imagout.c and itextdcl.c. This was probably your second posting, given the numbering you have been using. Also a lot of files (men.c, pgad.c, imagfunc.c, imagdcl.c and maybe som others) had some lines with embedded CR's that broke the compiler). One has to just delete the CR's to get it to compile. -- Marco Papa
vanam@pttesac.UUCP (Marnix van Ammers) (12/14/86)
In article <2219@bacall.UUCP> papa@bacall.UUCP (Marco Papa) writes: >John, > >4 files didn't make it here: imagimag.c, imag.c, imagout.c and itextdcl.c. >This was probably your second posting, given the numbering you have been >using. Also a lot of files (men.c, pgad.c, imagfunc.c, imagdcl.c and maybe >som others) had some lines with embedded CR's that broke the compiler). >One has to just delete the CR's to get it to compile. Only image.c was missing in the original postings on my machine. I've got all the files now and I've fixed all the lines which were split at column 80. I still had 2 unresolved references (or whatever they're called): isdigit() and ActivateGadget(). I called John and he said that I needed to compile on WB 1.2 . I can't see what the difference is. They're still going to be unresolved references aren't they? I mean I'm still using the same linking libraries. Anyway, I've finally got my Aztec C compiler working on WB 1.2 (I plan to post an article on that next), so I'll try it. I don't see how it's going to resolve ActivateGadget() though. Just to see what the thing looked like, I changed the call to ActivateGadget() to a printf("sorry, can't find ActivateGadget()\n"); Got a nice window with lots of pull down menus and lots of "sorry, can't ...". I gather that EGad is going to allow me to write applications with all kinds of gadgets without having to do a lot of thinking. I haven't seen any documentation yet, so I don't know for sure. Did I miss a posting or isn't there any documentation? Oh, I fixed the call to isdigit by saying if(c>='0' && c<='9'). I think isdigit is defined as a macro somewhere in one of the include files (ctype.h ?), but didn't see the need for including it when it's just one call. So the only problem I still have is not having ActivateGadget(). -- Marnix (ain't unix!) A. van\ Ammers Work: (415) 545-8334 Home: (707) 644-9781 CEO: MAVANAMMERS:UNIX UUCP: {ihnp4|ptsfa}!pttesac!vanam CIS: 70027,70
wilkes@beatnix..UUCP (John Wilkes) (12/19/86)
In article <358@pttesac.UUCP> vanam@pttesac.UUCP (Marnix van Ammers) writes: > >he said that I needed to compile on WB 1.2 . I can't see what the >difference is. They're still going to be unresolved references >aren't they? I mean I'm still using the same linking libraries. > I wonder if he meant that you need the 1.2 include files instead of the 1.1 includes? That could make a difference. -- John Wilkes -- UUCP: {ihnp4|decwrl|pyramid}!sun!elxsi!beatnix!wilkes USPS: ELXSI, 2334 Lundy Pl., San Jose CA 95131 # My Employer appologizes for the fact that I have access to the network. # Furthermore, my Employer has absolutely no responsibility for the above # random ramblings, which are clearly the product of a deranged mind.