moz_required_dlls_v1

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

moz_required_dlls_v1

Dave Yeo-3
I've very quickly thrown together a package of hopefully all the
required DLLs for builds based on 17ESR and 24ESR except libc065.dll and
mzfntcfgft. Currently in Hobbes incoming,
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?button=Search&key=moz_required_dlls_v1.zip&dir=%2F 
should work once Hobbes updates its database.
Bob and Ray, can you test?
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: moz_required_dlls_v1

Steve Wendt
On 6/2/2014 9:31 PM, Dave Yeo wrote:

> I've very quickly thrown together a package of hopefully all the
> required DLLs for builds based on 17ESR and 24ESR

Without checking it, is this different/better than the one I did?
http://os2news.warpstock.org/mozsupport.zip

If so, I can link to yours instead, but I'd hope mmap and pthread become
statically linked in the future.

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: moz_required_dlls_v1

Dave Yeo-3
Steve Wendt wrote:

> On 6/2/2014 9:31 PM, Dave Yeo wrote:
>
>> I've very quickly thrown together a package of hopefully all the
>> required DLLs for builds based on 17ESR and 24ESR
>
> Without checking it, is this different/better than the one I did?
> http://os2news.warpstock.org/mozsupport.zip
>
> If so, I can link to yours instead, but I'd hope mmap and pthread become
> statically linked in the future.
>

Good question, I see that you included a couple of DLLs that I didn't,
pthread.dll (unneeded I believe), ssp.dll and supcpp.dll. We also both
missed gcc444.dll for mmap.dll.
On the other hand I included support for FF24.3 with gcc473.dll and
stdcpp6.dll. Actually this build of SM 2.14 is using stdcpp6.dll and
gcc473.dll, why I'm not sure of.
Need to test and perhaps upload v2 and then my package may be better.

I plan on refreshing the 17ESR builds including statically linking mmap
and pthread but for 24ESR based I'm not sure as I may be forced to use
the rpm/yum environment to get a capable Python. We'll have to see.
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: moz_required_dlls_v1

Dave Yeo-3
Dave Yeo wrote:
> Need to test and perhaps upload v2 and then my package may be better.

Quickly testing my package seems to supply everything but I didn't
reboot to make sure all DLLs were unloaded so it needs more testing
tomorrow and it is missing gcc444.dll.
We'll also see how Ray and Bob do
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Bob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: moz_required_dlls_v1

Bob
I replaced the dll's with the ones from Dave's package and FF ESR 1705b2 came up
as expected. I then rebooted and put the old dll's back to do a one by one test.
The one that does the trick is having pthr01.dll in the libpath which I didn't
originally have at all. With that FF works with all the original dll's as well
as the ones from your package. Thank you Dave and Steve for putting that together.

Bob
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: moz_required_dlls_v1

Ray Davison
In reply to this post by Dave Yeo-3
Dave Yeo wrote:

> We'll also see how Ray and Bob do

I will be mostly off-line until mid August.

Ray


_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: moz_required_dlls_v1

Ray Davison
In reply to this post by Dave Yeo-3
Dave Yeo wrote:

> Quickly testing my package seems to supply everything but I didn't
> reboot to make sure all DLLs were unloaded so it needs more testing
> tomorrow and it is missing gcc444.dll.
> We'll also see how Ray and Bob do

I used only moz_required_dlls_v1 which still say 2014/06/02 on Hobbes.
I already had a gcc444.dll dated 5-1-10.  I did also use mzfntcfgft 2-5-3.

I used a profile that was last used by SM-Win 2.25.  The email folder
tree appears to still be intact.

The last SM-OS/2 I used was 272 dated 3June2012.  I ran that after 214.
  Mail looks OK until you realize that when you open a subject you get
the body of a message from a different folder.  I closed 272 and ran 214
again and mail seems OK.

And so it appears that OS/2 and Win data are compatible again.

Ray



_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: moz_required_dlls_v1

Dave Yeo-3
Ray Davison wrote:
> Dave Yeo wrote:
>
>> Quickly testing my package seems to supply everything but I didn't
>> reboot to make sure all DLLs were unloaded so it needs more testing
>> tomorrow and it is missing gcc444.dll.
>> We'll also see how Ray and Bob do
>
> I used only moz_required_dlls_v1 which still say 2014/06/02 on Hobbes. I
> already had a gcc444.dll dated 5-1-10.  I did also use mzfntcfgft 2-5-3.

Yea, I never bothered updating for gcc444.dll as most everyone already
has it.

>
> I used a profile that was last used by SM-Win 2.25.  The email folder
> tree appears to still be intact.
>
> The last SM-OS/2 I used was 272 dated 3June2012.  I ran that after 214.
>   Mail looks OK until you realize that when you open a subject you get
> the body of a message from a different folder.  I closed 272 and ran 214
> again and mail seems OK.

Interesting, I went back and forth with Thunderbird and never had a
problem and others reported no problems with SM and TB (same code
including the incompatible msf file problem)

>
> And so it appears that OS/2 and Win data are compatible again.
>

Good to hear it. Need to revisit building FF24 and then newer SM and TB.
Dave

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2