Who maintains tcltk? I have a patch for you.

Who maintains tcltk? I have a patch for you.

[Eric Toombs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 479 bytes --]

I apologize in advance if this is the wrong place to post this. I would
have mailed the package's maintainers directly but the "MAINTAINERS"
file in the source tree appeared to belong to gcc's source tree, along
with every other piece of documentation at the top of the source 
tree--kinda weird.

Anyway, the current source tree of tcltk (20060202-1) doesn't compile on 
account of a misnamed or perhaps renamed macro in tcl/win/tclWinPipe.c. 
a diff is attached.

Eric Toombs


[-- Attachment #2: fix-macro.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 364 bytes --]

--- tcl/win/tclWinPipe.c.old	2006-02-02 14:47:17.001000000 -0500
+++ tcl/win/tclWinPipe.c	2008-04-20 00:28:05.625000000 -0400
@@ -1229,7 +1229,7 @@
     BuildCommandLine(execPath, argc, argv, &cmdLine);
 
 #ifdef __CYGWIN__
-    cygwin_internal (CW_SETUP_WINENV);
+    cygwin_internal (CW_SYNC_WINENV);
 #endif
 
     if ((*tclWinProcs->createProcessProc)(NULL, 

Re: Who maintains tcltk? I have a patch for you.

[Brian Dessent]

Eric Toombs wrote:

> I apologize in advance if this is the wrong place to post this. I would
> have mailed the package's maintainers directly but the "MAINTAINERS"
> file in the source tree appeared to belong to gcc's source tree, along
> with every other piece of documentation at the top of the source
> tree--kinda weird.

The toplevel is shared between a number of projects: gcc, binutils,
gdb/insight/sim, newlib, cygwin, etc.  They are all just portions of one
large tree, although with gcc using SVN now they are physically two
trees, but in reality it's still one large logical tree.  A tarball
release for each individual project contains a subset of the whole tree,
toplevel+some number of subdirs.

The tcl dirs are part of insight, so patches should go to the insight
mailing list.

> --- tcl/win/tclWinPipe.c.old    2006-02-02 14:47:17.001000000 -0500
> +++ tcl/win/tclWinPipe.c        2008-04-20 00:28:05.625000000 -0400
> @@ -1229,7 +1229,7 @@
>      BuildCommandLine(execPath, argc, argv, &cmdLine);
> 
>  #ifdef __CYGWIN__
> -    cygwin_internal (CW_SETUP_WINENV);
> +    cygwin_internal (CW_SYNC_WINENV);
>  #endif
> 
>      if ((*tclWinProcs->createProcessProc)(NULL,

This has been fixed for some time already:
<http://sourceware.org/ml/insight/2007-q2/msg00034.html>.

Brian

Re: Who maintains tcltk? I have a patch for you.

[Eric Toombs]

Brian Dessent wrote:
> This has been fixed for some time already:
> <http://sourceware.org/ml/insight/2007-q2/msg00034.html>.
>
> Brian
>   
Well then it should probably be included with the source tree that is 
setup.exe downloads by default, unless source distributions are 
generally not expected to compile out of the box.

Eric

Re: Who maintains tcltk? I have a patch for you.

[Brian Dessent]

Eric Toombs wrote:

> Well then it should probably be included with the source tree that is
> setup.exe downloads by default, unless source distributions are
> generally not expected to compile out of the box.

You're looking at an old version from 2006.  How can you possibly expect
that to contain a patch from 2007?  The source package contains the
source as it existed when the package was built, and when that package
was built in 2006 it did build correctly OOTB.  By trying to build it
against current Cygwin you remove that context, and it's not unexpected
for errors to pop up as a result.  Until they invent time travel, it
will not be possible to write code that is immune to future external
changes.

It would be very wrong for the source package to not correlate exactly
to what was used to build the binary package, as that would violate the
GPL and common sense.

Anyway, upgrade to the current gdb-6.8-2 and it will include the patch
and should build OOTB.

Brian

Re: Who maintains tcltk? I have a patch for you.

[Eric Toombs]

Brian Dessent wrote:
>
> It would be very wrong for the source package to not correlate exactly
> to what was used to build the binary package, as that would violate the
> GPL and common sense.
>   
Oh ok. So in other words, the source is provided as a reference and not 
necessarily for building the package again.
> Anyway, upgrade to the current gdb-6.8-2 and it will include the patch
> and should build OOTB.
>
> Brian
>   
You mean in the setup, I install the latest version of the gnu debugger 
and that will allow tcl to build out of the box? What does gdb have to 
do with tcl?

Re: Who maintains tcltk? I have a patch for you.

[Brian Dessent]

Eric Toombs wrote:

> Oh ok. So in other words, the source is provided as a reference and not
> necessarily for building the package again.

It is provided for building the package again in the same context that
it was originally built in.  You can't change variables like the
versions of libraries used and not expect minor differences; if you used
the version of the Cygwin library that was current in Feb 2006 at the
time the package was created it would build OOTB.

> You mean in the setup, I install the latest version of the gnu debugger
> and that will allow tcl to build out of the box? What does gdb have to
> do with tcl?

The packages are related in that the tcltk package is the specific copy
of tcl/tk that is bundled with the insight source tree, not a general
purpose "tcl/tk in its own right" -- it exists for the sole purpose of
supporting insight.  Insight is packaged with gdb, as it's really just
an enhanced version of gdb.

But I had incorrectly assumed that since these two packages are related
that with the new gdb release there would be a corresponding new tcltk
release, but I now see that is not the case and the old 20060202 version
of tcltk remains current despite insight being updated to 6.8-2.

Brian