Re: [Axiom-developer] making ccl on cygwin

[Mike Dewar]

Hi Bill,

The versions of Axiom up to 2.2 for Windows were built with Watcom C
because it was the fastest C compiler around at the time.  We moved to
Visual C++ (version 6 I think) for Axiom 2.3 since Watcom C was no
longer supported.  We never built a cygwin version.  The version of CCL
you have is a merge of our latest version with Arthur Norman's, and I
haven't tried building it under Windows.

The license manager certainly needed RPC, as did our link to the NAG
Library (on Unix only).  I'm not sure whether any of the graphics or
sman code used it - I don't think so but I could be wrong.

The code I sent to Tim was tested on Redhat Linux (nominally 6.2 but it
gets patched and upgraded constantly) with gcc 2.91.66.  

Good luck!

Mike.

On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 08:32:11PM -0500, Bill Page wrote:
> Tim,
> 
> I have been trying hard to get CCL to compile
> and link under Cygwin. I have resolved most
> problems but I've run into a problem with the
> "rusty" coding in CCL relating to remote procedure
> calls (rpc). There are several variants of the
> rpc api, the one being used by CCL is originally
> from SUN. Cygwin does not normally include this
> so the #include "rpc/rpc.h" is not defined
> instead there is a "win32/rpc.h" which has a
> somewhat different set of interface routines
> and parameters. I was able to locate a version
> of the SUN rpc which had been adapted for Cygwin
> but it is not being directly maintained by the
> Cygwin people. Anyway, after installing it
> successfully, I got further with the CCL compile
> but then ran into some C code that does not
> conform to the standards expected by gcc version
> 3.2 (at least not with the options that the
> Makefile contains).
> 
> What version of C compiler are you using? Is
> it gcc 3.2 on Red Hat 8.0 linux or some other?
> 
> Anyway, I was wondering what you might think
> about a some surgery to get rid of what appears
> to be some "code rot" in this part of CCL? Is
> rpc really needed for Axiom? I can imagine that
> it might be relevant to someone interested in
> parallel processing versions etc. but I expect
> that anyone serious about doing this sort of
> development would prefer a more modern inter-
> process communication protocol than rpc? No?
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Page.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Axiom-developer mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
> 
> _____________________________________________________________________
> This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
> delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
> information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
> Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.