This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RESOLVED: GCC 2.95.2 make problems under Cygwin 1.1.4
- To: <cygwin at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Subject: RESOLVED: GCC 2.95.2 make problems under Cygwin 1.1.4
- From: shell at shellware dot com (Shell M. Shrader)
- Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 03:01:47 -0400
I was able to finally get GCC 2.95.2 make(ed) and installed under the Cygwin Net release on my Win2k machine but it wasn't without dificulties.
I had to modify two routines to get the make to succeed: etime_.c and dtime_.c
etime_.c & dtime_.c both reference the HighPart and LowPart properties of the LONG_INTEGER datatype. However, they nor any of their included modules #include winnt.h which is the only win32 header I could locate that defines this structure.
In both routines the HighPart and LowPart properties were being used to facilitate a hack for non NT win32 systems---
...
LARGE_INTEGER freq;
...
/* We need to use this hack on non-NT platforms, where the first call
returns 0.0 and subsequent ones return the correct value. */
if (win32_platform != VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_NT)
{
...
clock_freq = ((unsigned long long) freq.HighPart << 32)
+ ((unsigned) freq.LowPart);
...
count = ((unsigned long long) counter_val.HighPart << 32)
+ (unsigned) counter_val.LowPart;
...
I opted to comment out the references to HighPart and LowPart and simply return a value of 1 in both routines because I'm on an NT system and could care less of the impact to non-NT systems as this is a localized installation. I suspect the proper thing to do would be to #include winnt.h or track down the source of LARGE_INTEGER without including winnt.h but I was fearful that I would cause additional conflicts and I'm tired of messin' with the make.
Previously I had tried to use the GCC Cygwin patches to take care of the compiler warnings but gave up as they introduced incoherent FATALs within my Stage 1 build. Guess I'll soon find out the impact of the multple compiler warnings I got.
Am I the only W2K gcc-2.95.2 / Cygwin 1.1.4 user out there to have this problem? I find it very hard to believe that I'm the first W2K gcc-2.95.2 / Cygwin 1.1.4 user.
Shell