Cray XT4/Catamount build

The attached patch looks big and scary especially this close
to a RC
(so little bird told me), but the scariness is illusory.

Most of the patch consists of turning utils/Makefile into
utils/Makefile.SH (the former deleted, the latter added),
simply because
I needed to get the $run from config.sh.  Similarly, lots of
$(RUN)
insertions into the top-level Makefile.SH, again harmless
unless one has
RUN defined (and roughly 99.999999% of people have it not).
For ppport.h a bigger kludge was required, but it should
have no effect
on non-Catamount platforms.

With this patch Catamount now builds "perl",
which, however, due to lack
of dynaloading and thanks to cross-compilation pain is
equivalent to
"miniperl" by not having any extensions.  Neither
can "make install"
be run, since no globbing can be done (again, due to
Catamount's severe
API limitations).  But now one can manually copy the headers
and the
libperl.a and embed Perl, and therefore we are on par with
Python on
the Catamount platform 

A shinier version of the patch attached, if applied please
use this,
not the one I sent couple of days ago.

As I tested embedding a Perl interpreter to a Catamount
program, I found
out that the earlier scheme didn't quite work... the changes
were all to
hints/catamount.sh.  As a sanity check, the desired final
state of
hints/catamount.sh is also attached.  (The changes to
Makefile* are
still necessary, too, for the "perl" build to
succeed.)

On 16/09/2007, Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhiiki.fi> wrote:
> A shinier version of the patch attached, if applied
please use this,
> not the one I sent couple of days ago.

Thanks, applied as #31878.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> On 16/09/2007, Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhiiki.fi> wrote:
>> A shinier version of the patch attached, if applied
please use this,
>> not the one I sent couple of days ago.
> 
> Thanks, applied as #31878.


Affected files ...

... //depot/perl/MANIFEST#1621 edit
... //depot/perl/Makefile.SH#390 edit
... //depot/perl/ext/util/make_ext#20 edit
... //depot/perl/hints/catamount.sh#2 edit
... //depot/perl/utils/Makefile#33 delete
... //depot/perl/utils/Makefile.SH#1 add

OUCH, no more Makefile in utils/ kaboom for MSWin32 :(

Do we really need the shell thing or can we revert that part
of the patch?


Good luck,

Abe
- --
NickC> After I've eaten I'll have proper look at the
modperl source.

Grumble, grumble. What's with all this sleep and eat stuff?
I never remember
Jarkko having to sleep or eat.
                             -- Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes on
p5p 
2003-10-31
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


iD8DBQFG7vua0u0nt7xxiCIRAoujAJ4n0CuHQ55Iu+lgxcNWHaCXk03FhgCf
bLhF
o+pMDYKmZ3oRFTgyYH43A+o=
=5zp6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Abe Timmerman wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
>> On 16/09/2007, Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhiiki.fi> wrote:
>>> A shinier version of the patch attached, if
applied please use this,
>>> not the one I sent couple of days ago.
>> Thanks, applied as #31878.
> 
> 
> Affected files ...
> 
> ... //depot/perl/MANIFEST#1621 edit
> ... //depot/perl/Makefile.SH#390 edit
> ... //depot/perl/ext/util/make_ext#20 edit
> ... //depot/perl/hints/catamount.sh#2 edit
> ... //depot/perl/utils/Makefile#33 delete
> ... //depot/perl/utils/Makefile.SH#1 add
> 
> OUCH, no more Makefile in utils/ kaboom for MSWin32 :(
> 
> Do we really need the shell thing or can we revert that
part of the patch?

Urk.  Sorry.

Please do not revert it fully.  Maybe the utils/Makefile
could be
pre-generated?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> Abe Timmerman wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
>>> On 16/09/2007, Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhiiki.fi> wrote:
>>>> A shinier version of the patch attached, if
applied please use this,
>>>> not the one I sent couple of days ago.
>>> Thanks, applied as #31878.
>>
>> Affected files ...
>>
>> ... //depot/perl/MANIFEST#1621 edit
>> ... //depot/perl/Makefile.SH#390 edit
>> ... //depot/perl/ext/util/make_ext#20 edit
>> ... //depot/perl/hints/catamount.sh#2 edit
>> ... //depot/perl/utils/Makefile#33 delete
>> ... //depot/perl/utils/Makefile.SH#1 add
>>
>> OUCH, no more Makefile in utils/ kaboom for MSWin32
:(
>>
>> Do we really need the shell thing or can we revert
that part of the patch?
> 
> Urk.  Sorry.
> 
> Please do not revert it fully.  Maybe the
utils/Makefile could be
> pre-generated?

Or replace by a Perl thing? It wouldn't have to be
pre-generated then, we just
need to tweak the win32 makefiles.

Good luck,

Abe
- --
I don't mind taking the blame if it means someone else does
the work 
                                       -- Alan Burlison on
p5p 
2005-10-18
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


iD8DBQFG74Lg0u0nt7xxiCIRAug4AKCIyBZ/WoqqUrwRc48pFdli1o5GowCe
NgYA
6a7BbQF3Al8zKfwfFmAiWgY=
=qGKP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>>>
>>> Do we really need the shell thing or can we
revert that part of the patch?
>> Urk.  Sorry.
>>
>> Please do not revert it fully.  Maybe the
utils/Makefile could be
>> pre-generated?
> 
> Or replace by a Perl thing? It wouldn't have to be
pre-generated then, we just
> need to tweak the win32 makefiles.
> 

I think that would be a bit of an overkill, the
utils/Makefile is small
and simple, nothing like the toplevel Makefile.  The only
reason I
converted it from a plain Makefile to Makefile.SH is that I
needed
the $Config to be available, so that's the only thing
that gets
expanded.  It would be enough to run utils/Makefile.SH on
almost any
(capable) platform, the $Config is by default empty and
that is
fine.  On those platforms that can do *.SH the
utils/Makefile.SH would
then automatically be run, and utils/Makefile regenerated. 
I think the
only gotcha would be to guarantee that utils/Makefile has
the moral
equivalent of chmod u+w done on it, so that the regeneration
can happen
without problems.

> =qGKP
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 

Abe, would the attached patch work for you?  Or Steve?

(If and when applying this to perforce, I forget whether one
needs to
first do a chmod u+w and then a p4 add to get the
permissions right,
for the utils/Makefile)

Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> Abe, would the attached patch work for you?  Or Steve?
> 
> (If and when applying this to perforce, I forget
whether one needs to
> first do a chmod u+w and then a p4 add to get the
permissions right,
> for the utils/Makefile)

Yes, thanks--applied as #31899.

(My Cygwin ls showed the perms as 644 after applying the
patch anyway,
so there's no need for a chmod u+w. Hopefully the perms are
OK for those
OSes that want to regenerate the file.)