https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/index.php?a=rssfeed&t=102 The largest Smaug community resource site. - en SmaugMuds 60 https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=371#p371 I would rather change OS's. Didnt want that on it anyway (just had a disk laying around) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=371#p371 Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:46:00 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Somnio) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=370#p370 Not the operating system's fault in this case. It was the compiler component, though I imagine attempting to remove it and use a standard stable release would be quite the headache as there may be other things dependent on it. https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=370#p370 Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:34:40 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Samson) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=365#p365 I think it may be the later. *bonks head on desk* Yeah, I'm re-installing Fbsd on this thing, even though compaq loves to make it difficult. (plus, this is a good reason to install fbsd https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=365#p365 Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:48:17 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Somnio) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=369#p369 Hrm. Didn't notice the compiler version. SuSE pulled a Redhat 7.3 I see. Bad enough RH did this with 2.96 and raised a stink, now this? Heh. I have no idea what sort of results 3.3 will produce, but if that's a sign of things to come then it looks like the code may need a scrub. Or GCC needs a kick in the ass. https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=369#p369 Tue, 3 Jun 2003 12:51:01 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Samson) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=364#p364 > gcc (GCC) 3.3 20030226 (prerelease) (SuSE Linux) Scary! You're using a pre-release version of gcc 3.3! Oh well, no guts no glory! Hmmmmm, I just tried this expecting to get a warning, but... gcc -Wall didn't whine. #include typedef enum { ack = 0, pfft, foo, bar } e_foo; int main(void) { unsigned int a = -1; e_foo f = pfft; switch(a) { case -1: printf("I be broken! "); break; case 3: printf("I'm fine "); break; }; printf("f is %d ", f); return 1; } Firs https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=364#p364 Tue, 3 Jun 2003 10:45:33 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Quixadhal) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=368#p368 Ahh wait *click* You may also want to check up on the values that the switch case can hold. switch is a conditional statement... That's all I can see though. those two conditional statements. I mean, unless SuSe doesn't like something in the IS_NPC macro, but then it should kick out an error code from mud.h It also doesn't make sense that ch or vch could be unsigned, since they're data structures, not integers. I also checked up on both TAR_CHAR_* and skill_data->target... unless typedef e https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=368#p368 Tue, 3 Jun 2003 07:10:36 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Xorith) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=363#p363 That sounds like perhaps ch is signed, and vch is unsigned, but this shouldn't be... unless one isn't assigned to the CHAR_DATA data type. Hrm. This is just odd. I mean, it couldn't be an issue with C's compound expressions... right? That should be standard... Though that line of code escapes me as far as what it does... Well, you could try this: if (((IS_NPC(ch)) ? (IS_NPC(vch)) : (!IS_NPC(vch)))) and if (((IS_NPC(ch)) ? (!IS_NPC(vch)) : (IS_NPC(vch)))) It shouldn't make a difference th https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=363#p363 Tue, 3 Jun 2003 06:57:51 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Xorith) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=367#p367 Dont know about the compiler modification.. I've looked, but have been unable to find anything saying so. As for the lines, This is the selection. Dont remember WHICH lines specifically, but I places markers here to show you about where (My shell is down until tommorrow. (Stupid server maintenance :P) : ------------------------------------------------------- case TAR_CHAR_OFFENSIVE: *line 2425* if ( IS_NPC(ch) ? IS_NPC(vch) : !IS_NPC(vch) ) continue; https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=367#p367 Mon, 2 Jun 2003 03:44:45 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Somnio) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=362#p362 Not sure. Not unless SUSE modified the compiler for some bizarre reason. What's on those lines of code for you? https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=362#p362 Mon, 2 Jun 2003 02:04:46 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Samson) https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=366#p366 Hi. I've just swiched servers (at the begging of my sysadmin), and ran to a small problem. The base compiled just fine on the previous system, but when I moved it to the new machine the following err occurred on compile: -------------------------------------- Compiling o/websvr.o.... Compiling o/act_comm.o.... Compiling o/act_info.o.... Compiling o/act_move.o.... Compiling o/act_obj.o.... act_obj.c: In function `do_brandish': act_obj.c:2425: warning: signed and unsigned type in conditional https://smaugmuds.afkmods.com/topic/compile-issue-after-move-102/&p=366#p366 Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:53:05 CDT AFKMud Support & Development nobody@example.com (Somnio)