Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 14 Jun 2002 21:14:43 +0200 (METDST), Lutz Jaenicke via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt Richard: you seem to have a beta version of 3.1.1 around. Will its rt output for -dumpversion somehow fit into the model? : ; gcc -dumpversion 3.1.1 I see no problem. -- Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:52:11 -0700, Allen Hopkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: allenh I'm afraid this was not a fix. Have you tried it with gcc-3.1? allenh I encountered this problem with the 0.9.6d snapshot. I tried it just now, GCCVER becamse 31, and my output was -- gcc (GCC) 3.1.1 20020606 (Debian prerelease) Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. -- -- Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:52:11 -0700, Allen Hopkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: allenh I'm afraid this was not a fix. Have you tried it with gcc-3.1? allenh I encountered this problem with the 0.9.6d snapshot. I tried it just now, GCCVER becamse 31, and my output was -- gcc (GCC) 3.1.1 20020606 (Debian prerelease) Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. -- -- Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
Richard- Strange. I guess it's time to compare what we're looking at. I'm running on a Sun Ultra-60 w/ SunOS 5.8. I downloaded openssl-0.9.6d.tar.gz from http://www.openssl.org/source/. I then ran the following command: ./config --prefix=/usr/local/openssl-0.9.6d \ --openssldir=/usr/local/openssl-0.9.6d The output from that was: Operating system: sun4u-whatever-solaris2 ./config: test: unknown operator (GCC) The config script is dated Mar 15 08:47 (which I think is 15:47 GMT, since I'm in California and we're on Daylight Savings Time). Its size is 17352 bytes. The line that errors out for me is line 613: if [ $OUT = solaris-sparcv9-gcc -a $GCCVER -lt 28 ] I put the following in front of it to see the value of GCCVER: echo GCCVER = \$GCCVER\; exit and got this output: Operating system: sun4u-whatever-solaris2 GCCVER = gcc (GCC) 31 With the value of GCCVER having embedded whitespace, you can see why test would give up on it. I hope this helps. Let me know if you need anything else from me. -Allen Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:52:11 -0700, Allen Hopkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: allenh I'm afraid this was not a fix. Have you tried it with gcc-3.1? allenh I encountered this problem with the 0.9.6d snapshot. I tried it just now, GCCVER becamse 31, and my output was -- gcc (GCC) 3.1.1 20020606 (Debian prerelease) Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. -- -- Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
Richard- Strange. I guess it's time to compare what we're looking at. I'm running on a Sun Ultra-60 w/ SunOS 5.8. I downloaded openssl-0.9.6d.tar.gz from http://www.openssl.org/source/. I then ran the following command: ./config --prefix=/usr/local/openssl-0.9.6d \ --openssldir=/usr/local/openssl-0.9.6d The output from that was: Operating system: sun4u-whatever-solaris2 ./config: test: unknown operator (GCC) The config script is dated Mar 15 08:47 (which I think is 15:47 GMT, since I'm in California and we're on Daylight Savings Time). Its size is 17352 bytes. The line that errors out for me is line 613: if [ $OUT = solaris-sparcv9-gcc -a $GCCVER -lt 28 ] I put the following in front of it to see the value of GCCVER: echo GCCVER = \$GCCVER\; exit and got this output: Operating system: sun4u-whatever-solaris2 GCCVER = gcc (GCC) 31 With the value of GCCVER having embedded whitespace, you can see why test would give up on it. I hope this helps. Let me know if you need anything else from me. -Allen Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:52:11 -0700, Allen Hopkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: allenh I'm afraid this was not a fix. Have you tried it with gcc-3.1? allenh I encountered this problem with the 0.9.6d snapshot. I tried it just now, GCCVER becamse 31, and my output was -- gcc (GCC) 3.1.1 20020606 (Debian prerelease) Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. -- -- Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
I agree that simply using -dumpversion makes more sense, on the assumption that it will always only output the number. --version appears to be intended to be human-readable, not machine-readable, and its format may change at any time, as it just did. Why keep adding sed commands that say, oh, and if it has this in front of it, get rid of that, too? It might just break again with the next gcc version. Having said that, I think I'll bow out of the discussion. I'm just an end-user, and may never have to install it again. -Allen Lutz Jaenicke via RT wrote: Different solutions have been proposed and I am not sure whether the currently checked in version will finally work. I am not sure for how long -dumpversion was supported (at least since 1994 as was reported) and I strongly consider to use -dumpversion. Richard: you seem to have a beta version of 3.1.1 around. Will its output for -dumpversion somehow fit into the model? Best regards, Lutz __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 14 Jun 2002 21:14:43 +0200 (METDST), Lutz Jaenicke via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt Richard: you seem to have a beta version of 3.1.1 around. Will its rt output for -dumpversion somehow fit into the model? : ; gcc -dumpversion 3.1.1 I see no problem. -- Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
Lutz, I will create a patch against openssl-0.9.7-STABLE-snap-020612 with the gcc change and the __LP__ check for 64bit HPUX. If I get time I may look at dynamic linking. Cheers, Ross - Ross Alexander He knows no more about his MIS - NEC Europe Limiteddestiny than a tea leaf knows Work ph: +44 20 8752 3394 the history of East India Company |-+- | | Lutz Jaenicke via| | | RT | | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | Sent by: | | | owner-openssl-dev@| | | openssl.org | | | | | | | | | 13/06/2002 08:09 | | | Please respond to | | | openssl-dev | | | | |-+- -| | | | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Subject: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1) | -| [[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Jun 13 08:34:54 2002]: The config script needs to use gcc -dumpversion instead of gcc --version to determine the gcc version. gcc-3.1 outputs a bunch of text with --version, but just the number with -dumpversion, which also works for gcc-2.95. Sounds like a possible solution to the problem of gcc version recognition. The solution being included currently doesn't seem to be sufficient (see thread Various patches for 0.9.6d and 0.9.7-beta1, I have added [EMAIL PROTECTED] as another requestor for this ticket). For how long this flag has been supported? I suppose it will work on CYGWIN as well. Best regards, Lutz __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1)
Lutz, Here is the patch for config. I'm not sure if the 32bit/64bit gcc test is really in the right place, but its not too bad. (See attached file: config.diff) Cheers, Ross - Ross Alexander He knows no more about his MIS - NEC Europe Limiteddestiny than a tea leaf knows Work ph: +44 20 8752 3394 the history of East India Company |-+- | | Lutz Jaenicke via| | | RT | | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | Sent by: | | | owner-openssl-dev@| | | openssl.org | | | | | | | | | 13/06/2002 08:09 | | | Please respond to | | | openssl-dev | | | | |-+- -| | | | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Subject: [openssl.org #96] bug in config script (gcc 3.1) | -| [[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Jun 13 08:34:54 2002]: The config script needs to use gcc -dumpversion instead of gcc --version to determine the gcc version. gcc-3.1 outputs a bunch of text with --version, but just the number with -dumpversion, which also works for gcc-2.95. Sounds like a possible solution to the problem of gcc version recognition. The solution being included currently doesn't seem to be sufficient (see thread Various patches for 0.9.6d and 0.9.7-beta1, I have added [EMAIL PROTECTED] as another requestor for this ticket). For how long this flag has been supported? I suppose it will work on CYGWIN as well. Best regards, Lutz __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] config.diff Description: Binary data
