pocket newLISP.DLL possible ?

[HPW]

From:  "Alexander M." <mamaich@u...>

Date:  Thu Sep 2, 2004  12:00 am

Subject:  Re: newLISP.DLL compile possible ?



 

> ar.exe -d libc.a environ.o

>

> but then I got:

>

> arm-wince-pe-gcc -target=dll -staticlibs newlisp.o nl-symbol.o nl-

> math.o nl-list.o nl-liststr.o nl-string.o nl-filesys.o nl-sock

> .o nl-import.o nl-xml.o nl-web.o nl-matrix.o nl-debug.o pcre.o win32-

> util.o win32dll.o -onewlisp.dll

> /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/arm-wince-pe/3.3.3/../../../../arm-wince-

> pe/lib/libc.a: could not read symbols: Archive has no index; run

> ranlib to add one

> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status



You get the ranlib error when you use x86 version of AR. Use

arm-wince-pe-ar.exe to produce correct file.

[Lutz]

Thanks to Alexander for advice and thanks to Hans-Peter for the relay. A newlisp.dll is in http://newlisp.org/downloads/development/WinCE/">http://newlisp.org/downloads/development/WinCE/ ready for testing (based on newLISP v.8.1.5)



I will post newLISP development version 8.1.5 with the multicasting stuff, fixes for BSD and Solaris and makefiles for WinCE/DLL tomorrow.



Lutz

[HPW]

Lutz,



Thanks for the new platform!

Still in research for the pocket hardware.

(So much new stuff get into market like VGA-resolution

and Intel's GPU 2700g, Hard to make a choice)





And good luck with hurricane Francis over the weekend!

[HPW]

A happy new year to all newLISP'er.



Still no Pocket-hardware in the new year (Seems that Santa Claus miss my wish) ;-)

But I hope to get something this year.



In the meantime someone on the PocketGCC group talk about another compiler option for Pocket PC.



http://smorgasbordet.com/pellesc/">http://smorgasbordet.com/pellesc/



Seems to be a bit better supported platform on a first look. (But no info about any GCC compatibility)

Since I am not a C-Programmer, I does not know if it would be possible to compile newLISP with it. But maybe it is worth a second look.

[HPW]

On my question on Pelle C forum:

I will try to find some time to check it out - if the sources use 'standard C' (not C++ or GCC extensions) I can see no reason why it shouldn't work.



Pelle

[HPW]

Hello again,



I have looked some more on this.



At least so far, I have limited Pelles C to standard C, with some Microsoft extensions. A fairly common extension/different standard is "POSIX". It seems that the sources uses it (dirent.h, unistd.h and so on).



Adding the missing declarations (and functions!) is doable, but require some work (possibly even much work). It would be nice to add at least some of the missing stuff, but maybe not all - and it will probably take some time. At the moment, I don't see an *easy* solution...



Pelle

Seems that we have to use what we have so far!

;-)