Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Andreas Schnellbacher

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27
1
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 16, 2019, 12:01:09 am »
I've fixed quite some bugs, added the mentioned improvements and more. The encoding changes still have to be done.

Jochen, I'll address you tomorrow (it's now too late for listing details) per PM.

2
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 14, 2019, 08:51:43 pm »
I wonder if uninstalling the previous version is that important  that it should be given it own installation page and that WarpIn should be mentioned to do the uninstaall.
Yes, uninstallation should only be necessary, if previously installed files have to be uninstalled. IMO that applies for the system DLLs. Therefore I've added that paragraph on the first page, but it doesn't require an own installation page. You're right, it should be mentioned that, for uninstallation, WarpIN has to be be started. I'll add that.

BTW: The correct case for the name of the installer is: WarpIN.

3
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 14, 2019, 08:04:50 pm »
I have replaced the first version with a version with correct attribution.
The file dosbox-runyum.cmd is missing in your package. It should be added to package 2. That's the reason why yum wasn't started. And situations like this have to be reported, as I wrote. I'll improve that version.

Could you please fix also my name here?

Another item: The .txt files should be converted from windows-1252 to ibm-850. The .lang files are used in DOS and already have the correct codepage 850. That can be done with uconv:

uconv -i -c -f windows-1252 -t ibm-850 -o outfile infile
After that, copy outfile over the original encoded infile.

4
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 14, 2019, 06:07:04 pm »
Jochen, please correct my name.

On page 1, the trailing period of the last sentence is missing and Warpin should be changed to WarpIN.

Yum is not called for me. I've just tested it on an almost fresh ArcaOS 5.0.1, where sdl120.dll and libcn0.dll (due to an older libc) were not found.

At least the error should be indicated and an instruction how to proceed should pop up.

I'll try to find out what failed in the next days. It has worked for me on the other machine.

5
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 12, 2019, 10:42:47 pm »
The new version of run-yum seems to call yum only if no other package is selected. The version from yesterday with direct call of yum without the .cmd file doesn't have this problem. Therefore my favorite is again the anpm-text version.

(I don't understand this behavior. I remember that for NEPMD, all .cmd files being called by separately selectable packages work.)

OK, that was caused by having the DLL package installed in another dir than the rest. It all works now. I've also updated the .wis* file in the .zip file above to use the full path for dosbox-runyum.cmd, but that's not required.

6
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 12, 2019, 09:58:00 pm »
Note, however, that it is not a good idea to make the CMD wait on user input if there is any likelihood that the WPI might need to support CID-mode (headless) install, for obvious reasons.  (The aforementioned ClearType WPI gets away with it because it can't be distributed commercially anyway, so it's extremely unlikely to be called by a CID installer.)
Yes, that was one reason why I've favored the anpm-text version. Now I think, in a CID case, the .rpm files might be installed before. Then the DLL check might pass and omit calling the dosbox-runyum.cmd.

And I've added the -y parameter to yum in the .wis file. (I don't know how yum would behave in case of an error.)

7
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 12, 2019, 09:51:18 pm »
Thanks, Alex. Yes, that works.

I've updated the run-yum version. It contains another REXX file that calls yum.

Update on 2019-05-16: Fixed typo in dosbox-runyum.cmd that prevented the VIO window to become topmost.

8
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 11, 2019, 05:43:39 pm »
If you still want to provide the system DLLs as support package, I would create a .zip file (zip -9X dosboxsystemdlls dll1 dll2 dll3) and provide that separately.

Then it's a bit clearer that people who unpack that might run into problems later with other packages. But i won't do that.

9
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 11, 2019, 05:24:40 pm »
I've created two different versions for the install script: anpm-text and run-yum.

The first one adds  text on the new DLL detection page, if packages are missing. The additional text contains a hint how to install missing packages with Arca Noae Package Manager (ANPM). It lets the installation continue. The second one runs yum automatically when packages are missing and package 2 (Support DLLs) is activated. In both versions the support DLLs were removed, for the anpm-text version also the entire package 2.

Existing system DLLs from older packages have to be uninstalled manually with WarpIN. Select package "DOSBox2 Support DLLs" for uninstallation.

Unfortunately it's not possible with WarpIN to run a .cmd file normally. The window is hidden and the output invisible. One has to run WarpIN from a cmd.exe window to see messages that the called commands return. That's also the method how to debug .wis scripts. Additionally, ANPM doesn't provide the feature to accept package names as command line args. See the AN bug tracker. Therefore this option is also not possible. After these checks, I've created the anpm-text version, because for the automatic yum execution, error messages would be gobbled.

The included .cmd files require the file DOSBOX0.74_30.03.19.EXE in the same path. Both .cmd files create a file dosbox0.74_2019-05-11.exe.

Changes:
  • Added WarpIN window title.
  • Grouped NLS packages.
  • Added DLL detection page.
  • Removed support DLLs. The run-yum version still contains package 2, to execute the yum command for missing packages, but it has no files anymore. The anpm-text version adds only text to page 2 how to install the missing packges with ANPM.
  • Improved some texts.
  • Reformatted .wis file slightly.
  • Fixed typos etc.

10
Hardware / Re: One Mix 3 and OS/2, eCS or AOS?
« on: May 10, 2019, 12:41:39 pm »
No chance without drivers for NVMe and USB3. As it applies for all "newer" systems, it's questionable how much RAM is recognized.

11
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 09, 2019, 10:41:34 pm »
@Andreas, how can I switch the default state of a package.
It's no problem to give examples. (NEPMD, my project, is one.) But from what you wrote after that, it seems that you rather need other support for that.

Honestly, 15 years ago, when starting porting and maintaining DOSBOX, somebody write me the Warpin scripts.
I don't remember how Dosbox is distributed. My first thought today: If I'll find time I'll enhance the WarpIN installation. Bur after having read what I wrote last night and what others wrote about system DLLs, my opinion has changed a bit:

In NEPMD, I've included 1) md5.exe by Bob Eager, 2) lxlite.exe and unlock.exe and 3) wptools.dll. These are must-have tools to allow NEPMD process basic functions.

To 1) md5sum is nowadays installed on modern systems. md5.exe is then deactivated on installation. But unfortunately an already installed md5.exe NEPMD tool is not automatically uninstalled if md5sum.exe was found in the meantime. Md5.exe itself hasn't changed in the past and because it's an EXE and not a DLL, it won't interfere with other apps. Therefore: No problem to provide md5.exe with NEPMD. I've left it in the NEPMD package, because it was included already before the RPM/YUM times. The same applies to both other tools.

To 2) lxlite.exe and unlock.exe are system tools since an eCS version. They haven't changed much in the past. bww has released a new version with included changes from various people. I had replaced the previous Hobbes files with the bww files in the NEPMD package. Again, these files are EXEs, so it's no problem for other apps. There were installed in a tools dir that is not included in NEPMD's extended PATH. That means that also from command line, ther's no danger with these files.

To 3) wptools.dll is included since an eCS version. Even being a DLL, distributing it maybe additionally with a package may cause no problems, because development has stopped and it hasn't changed since ages.

But I won't include any of the e.g. gcc* DLLs with NEPMD, because such files are maintained and changed often.

So in your case, I find it the best method to avoid inclusion of these files. That applies also to libcn. If you want to support people who defer to use RPM/YUM, I see it as the only option to provide the required files in a separate package. (Steve Wendt did that for Mozilla versions.) With "package" I mean also "file". That means: create a special .wpi with these DLLs, but better keep them quite hidden to ensure people don't install them by mistake.

Dave has already described what the biggest problem for other apps may be. So, easiest is to just refer to the "yum install" command to install the prerequisites. What WarpIN can do, is to check for prerequisites and defer installation without it. Let's see, if I find time during the weekend to give examples and to add that to the Dosbox .wis script.

12
Applications / Re: Discussion about RPM/YUM and Libcn
« on: May 09, 2019, 01:46:16 am »
The converse is also possible with the newer version breaking older programs - yes I know that those producing the new version can't test it against every program that uses it.  That is why I have always tried to put everything a program needs to run in the directory of the program  and run everything from there.
That would increase the limitation caused by short shared memory extremely. It isn't a good idea, IMO.

A package writer can handle the problem better then simply adding DLLs that may be already installed by other packages: He can make the installation (addition) of these files optional and add code to preselect the proper selection state for it. For most users, the preselection is important, IMO. That's convenient for non-RPM users.

For an RPM user, it's important that a check for missing dependent packages is made before the preselection. Otherwise he may unintentionally end with a system having both local and common system DLLs, if system DLLs are included. In case anything misses, it should either be installed optionally or at least a message should pop up how the dependent packages have to be added (a yum or ANPM line).

IMO, it's better to assume the RPM method is used for installing system files. Additional dependent system DLLs should better be distributed in another package, if at all, for non-RPM users.

Both methods are possible with WarpIN, but one needs quite some code. Additionally, the next ANPM versions could handle the case when system DLLs were already installed by WarpIN packages. Much depends on how thoroughly the package writer has worked.

13
Programming / Re: Rexx Socket / SMTP
« on: May 04, 2019, 12:19:40 pm »
I've found another example written in REXX: John Small's ReleaseTool.cmd of FM/2. See the fm2/trunk source directory. It's much shorter than RexxMail.cmd, but regarding emails, it's only able to send them.

Logged in but still I get "no permission" when I try to read the file.
You seem to have tried the trac browser on netlabs.org. It works in some cases, but never for .cmd files. Browsing works reliable via this URL: http://svn.netlabs.org/repos/fm2/trunk/

For both trac and the web server browser, you don't have to log in.

14
Programming / Re: Rexx Socket / SMTP
« on: May 03, 2019, 09:47:11 pm »
I've found another example written in REXX: John Small's ReleaseTool.cmd of FM/2. See the fm2/trunk source directory. It's much shorter than RexxMail.cmd, but regarding emails, it's only able to send them.

15
Programming / Re: Rexx Socket / SMTP
« on: May 03, 2019, 05:39:17 pm »
You can also look at how Marcus de Geus did that in RexxMail. IIRC, attachments have to be base64-encoded, but I don't know how they are appended to the message text.

It looks like a lot of work, so using PMMail or one of the older Mozilla add-ons might be easier.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27