pwb@mrj.com (Peter W. Brewer) (05/01/91)
>Sun (SPARC/4.1.1). You mention some patches. Can you direct me to where I
Only an ftp away on interviews.stanford.edu in the contrib directory.
However, these patches only give you a clean compile. It does not
generate working libraries or applications yet. I am still working on it.
There are also available on the uunet machine in ~/tmp ..
Are the InterViews developers going to support g++ or gcc-1.92
e.g. the Objective C, gnu C, and C++ merger?
Peterlinton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton) (05/01/91)
In article <9105011321.AA16521@mrj.com>, pwb@mrj.com (Peter W. Brewer) writes: |> Are the InterViews developers going to support g++ or gcc-1.92 |> e.g. the Objective C, gnu C, and C++ merger? I don't know what you mean by "support". We'll certainly fix InterViews bugs that g++ uncovers and we'll try to avoid non-portable library classes. If InterViews uncovers g++ deficiencies, then we'll have to see what the best strategy is.
pwb@mrj.com (Peter W. Brewer) (05/02/91)
Steams again..... I have no problem if someone else (Doug Lea or me) does it. The problem I foresee is one of .. yes I can implement a compatible streams library, but how do I do it such that I can freely distribute it and not get in trouble with AT&T for doing so? It seems InterViews solved that problem at least at IV-2.6. Peter
linton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton) (05/02/91)
In article <9105011942.AA17600@mrj.com>, pwb@mrj.com (Peter W. Brewer) writes: |> |> Speaking of doc and 2.1 streams.. will the Stanford InterViews be providing |> their own verison of 2.1 streams as they did 1.0-1.2 streams in InterViews |> 2.6? No. It is more likely that we try to wean InterViews of streams. The ANSI C++ library committee is going to come up with a standard that is different from 2.1 streams, so there won't be anything standard here for a while.
bush@cse.uta.edu (Joe Bush) (05/11/91)
Sorry for asking what I suspect is a tired question to this group, but can anyone tell me the likelyhood of getting 3.0-beta to compile under g++ ? I have just read the README and it appears that the AT&T CC is the prefered compiler. Is it possible to make do with the GNU g++ compiler? Can libg++ be used? Is it needed? What are major difficuties? Many thanks to any who can shead light on these mysteries. - Joe -- bush@cse.uta.edu Vax Systems Manager (817) 273 - 3333 CSE Dept. UT-Arlington Office Rm 221 EB2 403 South Cooper P.O. Box 19015 Arlington, Texas 76019
pwb@mrj.com (Peter W. Brewer) (05/13/91)
>group, but can anyone tell me the likelyhood of getting 3.0-beta to >compile under g++ ? I have just read the README and it appears that Well, to bring you up to date on the current discussion: Mike Stump has apparently succeeded in getting g++ and InterViews to work for the most part, however, he is using gcc-1.92 which is a alpha-beta predecessor to gcc-2.0 an improved, new C compiler which will complete the merger of C and C++ and add Objective C for good measure. Apparently, (and I am guessing here), gcc-2.0 will come out probably close to the same time that X11R5 comes out, and InterViews 3.0 release , (as opposed to IV3.0 Beta), it may be that IV-3.0 will compile and run when used with the new gcc. I have succeeded in getting everything to compile with g++-1.39 (the current release), however, it doesn't work. I have not had time to iron out all of these bugs, (I'm stuck on a somewhat uninteresting Motif project), and based on Mike's comments I'm not sure if it would be worth my while, particularly if I have to go down to the level of testing individual objects one at-a-time. I guess the answer is : yes, you can indeed compile with g+-1,39, ( the current release), but no it does not function, e.g. Not a single application works without core dumping in different places.. and gdb doesn't work well with g++-1.39.. another wait until gdb-4.0 comes out things. Peter Brewer pwb%mrj.com@uunet.uu.net