Re: flex: exec failed? (root install/mount)

Re: flex: exec failed? (root install/mount)

[Jay]

 > [J] jay
 > [C] corinna
 > Subject: Re: flex: exec failed? (root install/mount)   


 > [J] configure:10596: /obj/gcc.5/i686-pc-cygwin/i686-pc-cygwin/build-i686-pc-cygwin/flex/flex conftest.l   
 > [J] strace: error creating process D:\\obj/gcc.5/i686-pc-cygwin/i686-pc-cygwin/build-i686-pc-cygwin/flex/flex, (error 3)  
 > [J]   
 > [J] which indicates the problem is:  
 > [J]  $ mount  
 > [J]  d:\bin on /usr/bin type system (binmode)  
 > [J]  d:\lib on /usr/lib type system (binmode)  
 > [J]  d: on / type system (binmode)  
 > [J]  c: on /cygdrive/c type system (binmode,noumount)  
 > [J]    
 > [J]  d: is being interpeted, as it is on Win32, as the current directory on drive d,  
 > [J]  and not, as intended here, as the root of d.  
    
 > [C]  This is never the case in Cygwin.  The above error message occurs in   
 > [C]  strace, which is not a Cygwin application, but a native Win32   
 > [C]  application.    
   
  Thanks Corinna. Good catch. I realize what you say, but on the other hand,  
  the mount stuff kind of lives in the transition zone between Win32  
  and the rest of Cygwin. Look, those are Win32 paths on the left, 
  and the theory I gave is reasonable, even if untrue. :)   

 
  However, I did later notice another problem.   
  After believing my theory, and reinstalling to c:\cygwin, 
  the error kept occuring.  
  (Oh, and yes, I stuck strace into the configure file).  


  Finally I remembered, that after the original problem, and noticing   
  that the gcc tree is apparently setup to build a bunch of stuff all together,   
  not just gcc, binutils, gmp, mpfr, but a bunch more, including flex,  
  I stuck the flex source in there as well. Figuring I'd maybe build  
  and debug it.Well, it appears the gcc's support for integrating  
  flex is actually not working.   


  Configuring binutils decides to run a flex that doesn't yet exist, if the source is there.  
  Looking in "." and looking where configure thinks flex will be, while perhaps  
  different by a path element or two, to the very lazy/casual/careless/Jay observer -- same thing.  


  SO, I've deleted the flex source, and reinstalled to c:\cygwin, and I'll punt this for now.  
  I have symlinks /c => /cygdrive/c, /obj => /c/obj, etc.   


  At some point I should go back to c:\ (or d:\, whatever), keep flex source out,  
  and see what happens. I still think my theory is close to correct, but I  
  probably polluted the repro case before the later debugging, oops.   
  I'm sure I didn't put the flex code there until after I first had some problem.   
 

  Thanks,
   - Jay


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Jay]

While Andrew's tone is a bit strong/rude, I do agree.
The keyboard should just work.
PC keyboards have been for a very long time now.

 
One of the "obvious problems" though is that there is never
any instant switch over from "old days" to "modern times".
It is a continuum. It is gradual.
Looking backward from our "current distant future", many
things look stupid, but they only ever get there gradually.
The teletype surely died off gradually, not instantly.
So how/when do you phase out support for it? How do you
have new code interoperate with the old code that
is "sensitive" to teletypes? Code lives a very long time of course.


How do you know removing support for something won't break someone?
Do you actively collect "telemetry" data as to the usage of everthing?
How close to zero is close enough?


When do you go back and remove workarounds for bugs at other layers, that
eventually got fixed? Nobody is still using your code along with the other?
Check versions and exit rudely? For "old" stuff? For anything you haven't tested?
For anything you haven't tested recently?
There are pluses and minuses. Blinding running ignoring the surrounds
is bad. You can't test every combination. You must be willing to run on stuff
you haven't tested.

 
Now, you know, an ironic thing here, is that Windows is the one
with a teletype compatibility that Unix folks/code don't like.

 
As I understand... there was a control code for a typewriter
to move the head (the carriage) to the start of the line,
and another for advancing the paper one line. As well, moving the head
took some time, so advancing the paper elegantly fill the gap.

 
Therefore you get carriage return followed by line feed.

 
Once you have electronic terminals, this separation is less
useful, but not actually useless (I'll come back to this).

 
So Unix folks arbitrarily chose linefeed.
Apple arbitrariliy chose carriage return (Apple II, pre-Mac OS X Mac).
Windows via MS-DOS presumably via CP/M didn't change.
A byte is wasted for every line darn.
 

Now, really, carriage return without line feed can be useful.
It is a way to implement "spinners" and other "fancy" ui
involving overwriting text on the same line.

 
I think linefeed might also be useful on its own, to go down one without
moving left or right. Not sure. Like maybe it is an optimization using
"free form" text ui such as vi, over a slow serial line??

 
I could be wrong here on the cr/lf story. Check Wikipedia...


 > That's the price of using stuff without understanding it.  


  Oh man.  
  Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone..  
  Everyone uses stuff they don't understand all the time.
  I use my brain, lungs, cars, airplanes, compilers, linkers, kernels, interpreters, Cygwin, etc... 
  I imagine I understand a lot, but... 

 
 - Jay

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Mark J. Reed]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Jay <jayk123@hotmail.com> wrote:
> While Andrew's tone is a bit strong/rude, I do agree.
> The keyboard should just work.

And it does.  Andrew had a misconfigured vim setup that was getting in the way.

> PC keyboards have been for a very long time now.

Yes.  But, again, you're not always on the local attached keyboard
when interacting with a Linux system.

Admittedly, even when not local,  99.9% of the time you'll be using
some sort of VT100/ANSI terminal emulator, so a lot of the flexibility
of the termcap/terminfo system is overkill at this point. But the
underlying abstraction - no matter how you are connected, it looks
like a tty to the host software - is still valuable.

>  > That's the price of using stuff without understanding it.
> >  Oh man.
>  Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone..

Fair enough. But I do at least try not to blame "the system" when I
screw something up because I didn't know what I was doing...

--
Mark J. Reed <markjreed@gmail.com>

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 09:16:40AM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Jay <jayk123@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>While Andrew's tone is a bit strong/rude, I do agree.  The keyboard
>>should just work.
>
>And it does.  Andrew had a misconfigured vim setup that was getting in
>the way.
>
>>PC keyboards have been for a very long time now.
>
>Yes.  But, again, you're not always on the local attached keyboard when
>interacting with a Linux system.
>
>Admittedly, even when not local, 99.9% of the time you'll be using some
>sort of VT100/ANSI terminal emulator, so a lot of the flexibility of
>the termcap/terminfo system is overkill at this point.  But the
>underlying abstraction - no matter how you are connected, it looks like
>a tty to the host software - is still valuable.
>
>>>That's the price of using stuff without understanding it.  Oh man.
>>Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone..
>
>Fair enough.  But I do at least try not to blame "the system" when I
>screw something up because I didn't know what I was doing...

Thank you Mark.  I think you have put your finger on the basic problem
which started this tedious discussion.

This thread veered away from anything to do with Cygwin a while ago.
Lets please move on now.  If there is still a need to express
disappointment with the way UNIX handles ttys then please find another
forum.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Andrew DeFaria]

Jay wrote:
> While Andrew's tone is a bit strong/rude, I do agree.
Thanks. BTW I don't see the point is striving to be weak! To me strong 
is good. Rude? Well that's your interpretation and I've long since given 
up trying to control others.
> The keyboard should just work. PC keyboards have been for a very long 
> time now.
>
> One of the "obvious problems" though is that there is never any 
> instant switch over from "old days" to "modern times". It is a 
> continuum. It is gradual. Looking backward from our "current distant 
> future", many things look stupid, but they only ever get there 
> gradually. The teletype surely died off gradually, not instantly. So 
> how/when do you phase out support for it? How do you have new code 
> interoperate with the old code that is "sensitive" to teletypes? Code 
> lives a very long time of course.
What is it in a teletype that requires that a backspace character print 
out ^? and people would look at it and say "Gee that's exactly what I 
wanted to see?"???

I once complained that on some Unixes, when at the password prompt, 
typing a backspace would screw up the entry of the password. I was told 
by old Unix folk that "well listen sonny, back when Unix started there 
were these teletypes here and well the backspace key was way far away 
and the del key was much closer so if you really want to erase the 
previous character while entering your password use del not backspace". 
Still other Unix folk insisted that backspace is a legitimate character 
for passwords and somebody may actually want to have backspace as part 
of their password.

I responded with "Well who the hell is using teletypes anymore" and "If 
somebody really wants to use backspace as part of their password should 
they be expected to jump through hoops to enter it instead of 
inconveniencing everybody else?". This was back in the '80s. Slowly 
getty started learning that backspace is supposed to do a backspace... 
Change is indeed difficult for some - but not for others.
> How do you know removing support for something won't break someone? Do 
> you actively collect "telemetry" data as to the usage of everthing? 
> How close to zero is close enough?
How about making the small minority of people with antiquated systems 
have it not work for them instead of having it not work for the masses?!?
-- 
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
He's not dead, he's electroencephalographically challenged.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Andrew DeFaria]

Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Jay <jayk123@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> While Andrew's tone is a bit strong/rude, I do agree. The keyboard 
>> should just work.
> And it does. Andrew had a misconfigured vim setup that was getting in 
> the way.
Don't speak for me! I will speak for myself. I misconfigured vim for a 
reason. That reason was that backspace was not performing it's function 
in the first place. I didn't willy nilly go in there and say "Well let 
me add this just because it oughta be fun". Something was broken and I 
was attempting to fix it. What was broken was the natural and normal 
functioning of the backspace key. If that key was working in an expected 
and normal way why the hell would I be in there mucking around?!?

And as I said, the "documentation" was, ahem.... well less than 
instructive in this regard.
>> PC keyboards have been for a very long time now.
> Yes. But, again, you're not always on the local attached keyboard when 
> interacting with a Linux system.
Come on now! 99% of the time you are. 99% of the other OSes get it 
right. Stop making excuses!
> Admittedly, even when not local, 99.9% of the time you'll be using 
> some sort of VT100/ANSI terminal emulator, so a lot of the flexibility 
> of the termcap/terminfo system is overkill at this point. But the 
> underlying abstraction - no matter how you are connected, it looks 
> like a tty to the host software - is still valuable.
I would not consider it valuable if it doesn't perform it's intended and 
labeled (mind you) function.
>> > That's the price of using stuff without understanding it.
>>> Oh man.
>> Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone..
> Fair enough. But I do at least try not to blame "the system" when I 
> screw something up because I didn't know what I was doing...
You would if you admit that it was the system that was screwed up before 
that made you get under the hood in an attempt to fix it in the first 
place! You would if you were open minded enough to admit that it's only 
Unix that suffers this affliction with this specific key.
-- 
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Bureaucracy: a method of turning energy into solid waste.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Andrew DeFaria]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Thank you Mark. I think you have put your finger on the basic problem 
> which started this tedious discussion.
You are entitled to your opinion. Surely you allow others to hold 
differing opinions than yours. But I must ask, if you find this 
discussion tedious then what stops you from simply ignoring it?
-- 
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
I don't have a solution but I admire the problem.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Karl M]

> From: Andrew
> Subject: Re: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)
> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 09:06:51 -0700
>
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Thank you Mark. I think you have put your finger on the basic problem
>> which started this tedious discussion.
> You are entitled to your opinion. Surely you allow others to hold
> differing opinions than yours. But I must ask, if you find this
> discussion tedious then what stops you from simply ignoring it?
> --
Because it is a distraction; it is no longer a topic for which most people subscribed to this list. While ignoring it saves some time it does not eliminate the cost, and that cost is multiplied by many list members. So, there is also a legitimate reason to exercise control in the input side of the process as well as the output side.

There is the Cygwin talk list where you can carry on at length. I for one, appreciate Christopher's diligence in keeping the list on topic and feel that he deserves a gold star simply for that; there are of course many more deserved all of his other work.

Thanks,

...Karl
_________________________________________________________________
Stay in touch when you're away with Windows Live Messenger.
http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger2_072008

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: configuring the backspace key, etc. (un-indenting doesn't work with vim)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 09:06:51AM -0700, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 09:50:40AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>Thank you Mark.  I think you have put your finger on the basic problem
>>which started this tedious discussion.
>>
>>This thread veered away from anything to do with Cygwin a while ago.
>>Lets please move on now.  If there is still a need to express
>>disappointment with the way UNIX handles ttys then please find another
>>forum.
>
>You are entitled to your opinion.  Surely you allow others to hold
>differing opinions than yours.  But I must ask, if you find this
>discussion tedious then what stops you from simply ignoring it?

Unfortunately my "opinion" trumps yours here.  You're using this forum
that I administer to blather on about subjects that have nothing to do
with Cygwin.

This really is the final warning.  Take your off-topic discussion
somewhere else.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: flex: exec failed? (root install/mount)

[phil long]

>As a follow-up and clarification to my previous post, what I would
>like to be able to do is to pipe output to a printer, e.g.
>ls -l | lpr
>This doesn't work for me as I explained previously. Using notepad /P 

I'll bet it doesn't!  From the lpr manpage:
No formatting is done -- data is sent "raw".

This means your printer has to understand *raw* text, which is what the 'ls' command generates.  Many printers can do this, but U'll probably have to play with driver setup to make it work.



BTW, I didn't see this thread on gmane yet, so I just started it over.  I apologize for messing up threading, but I just *had* to reply.


____________________________________________________________
Click to see huge collection of designer watches.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/Ioyw6iie2atUHtI1aAGPjGD6RZew9zmJ8AOq3k8bX2bmvK7k16TTx4/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: flex: exec failed? (root install/mount)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Jul 16 19:33, Jay wrote:
> 
> configure:10596: /obj/gcc.5/i686-pc-cygwin/i686-pc-cygwin/build-i686-pc-cygwin/flex/flex conftest.l
> strace: error creating process D:\\obj/gcc.5/i686-pc-cygwin/i686-pc-cygwin/build-i686-pc-cygwin/flex/flex, (error 3)
> 
> which indicates the problem is:
> 
> $ mount
> d:\bin on /usr/bin type system (binmode)
> d:\lib on /usr/lib type system (binmode)
> d: on / type system (binmode)
> c: on /cygdrive/c type system (binmode,noumount)
> 
> 
> d: is being interpeted, as it is on Win32, as the current directory on drive d, and not, as intended here, as the root of d.

This is never the case in Cygwin.  The above error message occurs in
strace, which is not a Cygwin application, but a native Win32
application.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: flex: exec failed? (root install/mount)

[Jay]

configure:10596: /obj/gcc.5/i686-pc-cygwin/i686-pc-cygwin/build-i686-pc-cygwin/flex/flex conftest.l
strace: error creating process D:\\obj/gcc.5/i686-pc-cygwin/i686-pc-cygwin/build-i686-pc-cygwin/flex/flex, (error 3)

which indicates the problem is:

$ mount
d:\bin on /usr/bin type system (binmode)
d:\lib on /usr/lib type system (binmode)
d: on / type system (binmode)
c: on /cygdrive/c type system (binmode,noumount)


d: is being interpeted, as it is on Win32, as the current directory on drive d, and not, as intended here, as the root of d.
I tried unmounting it and explicitly mounting d:\, d:\\, d:/, but they still all got treated as d:.
Tried editing the registry, same thing. Used d:\foo also to make sure what I was doing was being seen by the code.

Another way to achieve what I want is for d:\cygwin to be an NTFS junction do d:\, but then I have circularities in my file system, which I'd rather avoid.

I know installing to the root is discouraged, but..agreed this is a bug? Should be fixed? It is easy to fix? I think so, on all counts.
I'm sure I can provide a patch.

The /cygdrive mounts must deal with this specially??

 - Jay

> From: jayk123@hotmail.com
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: FW: flex: exec failed?
> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:55:06 +0000
>
>> From: jayk123@hotmail.com
>> To: cygwin@cygwin.org
>> Subject: flex: exec failed?
>> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:53:23 +0000
>>
>>
>> anyone familiar with this:
>>
>> flex: fatal internal error, exec failed
>> flex: error writing output file lex.yy.c

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/