Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20001008132750.01fa0f20@pop.ma.ultranet.com>
X-Sender: lhall AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 13:33:36 -0400
To: darkmoon AT cinenet DOT net (Jeff), cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
Subject: Re: Building C-Kermit (6.0.192) with Cygwin 1.1
In-Reply-To: <0s635gtMCtrU092yn@cinenet.net>
References: <L8L35gtMC1zf092yn AT cinenet DOT net>
 <20001005141101 DOT C20946 AT cygnus DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 07:01 PM 10/7/2000, Jeff wrote:
>On Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:11:01 -0400, Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 10:48:59AM -0700, Jeff wrote:
> >
> >>Which of the makefile targets work best?  I tried modifying the linux
> >>target, and get:
><big snip>
>
> >Why does this explain anything?  I don't see any hint of a "u_long" in this.
> >Cygwin defines u_long in /usr/include/sys/types.h just like most other
> >UNIX systems.
>
>Thanks, that solved *that* problem-- I copied the typedef to the top of
>the .c file, and *that* module built without error.  The next one died
>with some other error, but for the same reason: Things are being left
>out that should be in, or v.v.  C-Kermit has so many cross-referenced
>#ifdef's, #ifndef's, (lines upon lines of "#ifdef WHATEVER; #define
>THIS; #undefine THAT:...) and #include's pointing back and forth across
>different files that it is really not possible for me to tell what's
>happening.
>
>So, I'm back to my original question:  Which of the makefile targets
>work best?  When presented with a package that has very system-specific
>targets, which is best?  Which flavor of Unix does Cygwin most
>resemble?  Linux?  FreeBSD?  Or maybe a more general target, if
>available, such as BSD or System5R4?  Or-?  C-Kermit has never failed
>to build and run "straight out of the box" when it was obvious which
>makefile target to use.
>
>Thanks again for your help,
>
>Jeff



Sorry but that's just not an easy question to answer.  You're best bet if 
you want to find out relative to C-Kermit is to try one.  Better yet, if
C-Kermit comes with configure (I know nothing about C-Kermit), why not just 
run that?  Cygwin is probably close to Linux or FreeBSD but that means
little in terms of getting any particular package to build, since Cygwin
has to live within the confines of Win32.  Still, if this is the route you'd 
like to pursue, I'd recommend starting with one of these systems.  I doubt 
that most on the list would consider this a "supported" approach to a port
of C-Kermit to Cygwin though...


Good luck,




Larry Hall                              lhall AT rfk DOT com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
118 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com