In <email@example.com>, on 08/01/20
at 07:47 PM, "Dave Yeo" <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
>OK. My original env script put the 4.52 toolkit ahead of VACPP, which
>I'd think did the same thing.
As I said, gone is better. Less chance for it to accidentally get used.
If you cannot bear to delete the directories even though you have backups
of the content, rename the directory. Consider how much time getting to
the point has cost.
>This didn't happen here luckily. All \os2\dll files are dated newer.
Well my understanding is that you did not do a standard install of 3.0
followed by a standard install of FP8. Is this true?
>Which leads to, where to get the 4.0 toolkit?
You don't want the 4.0 toolkit. You want EMITC.DLL from the 4.0 toolkit.
I will provide a copy, if Lewis cannot track one down.
>So which toolkit to use?
4.5.2 with updates. It's got the fewest known defects.
>As noted earlier, I was running into problems
>with a Warp V4 define.
We now understand why.
>I was hoping to reproduce Chris's environment to start with.
I don't know about you, but I cannot think of any reliable or effective
way to duplicate an undocumented environment.
>he didn't really follow the rules and there's those hand written hh files.
As I mentioned IBM states that it's OK to write the .hh files by hand.
The purpose of DTS is to eliminate the need for .idl files and sc.exe. It
stands to reason that new .hh files would be coded by hand. To help with
the transition to DTS, IBM enhanced sc.exe so that it could generate the
.hh file when an .idl file happened to be available.