Sure, I'd appreciate that greatly. At least for another data point. I'm obviously missing something.
I don't see how the code in util.c/h gets defined if HAVE_MALLOC=0. Presumably you'd need to #undef HAVE_MALLOC in the case where you don't have the libc version, yes? Also, main.o doesn't seem to be linking with util.o in my setup. I ran the offending line of the build: LTIB> gcc -std=gnu99 -g -O2 -o cherokee main.o -lpthread -lrt -ldl main.o: In function `do_spawn': /home/rwalsh05/LTIB/cmn100/rpm/BUILD/cherokee-0.99.14/cherokee/main.c:329: undefined reference to `rpl_malloc' /home/rwalsh05/LTIB/cmn100/rpm/BUILD/cherokee-0.99.14/cherokee/main.c:338: undefined reference to `rpl_malloc' main.o: In function `pid_file_clean': /home/rwalsh05/LTIB/cmn100/rpm/BUILD/cherokee-0.99.14/cherokee/main.c:275: undefined reference to `rpl_malloc' main.o: In function `figure_worker_path': /home/rwalsh05/LTIB/cmn100/rpm/BUILD/cherokee-0.99.14/cherokee/main.c:91: undefined reference to `rpl_malloc' /home/rwalsh05/LTIB/cmn100/rpm/BUILD/cherokee-0.99.14/cherokee/main.c:110: undefined reference to `rpl_malloc' main.o:/home/rwalsh05/LTIB/cmn100/rpm/BUILD/cherokee-0.99.14/cherokee/main.c:118: more undefined references to `rpl_malloc' follow collect2: ld returned 1 exit status On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Stefan de Konink <[email protected]> wrote: > Rick Walsh wrote: > >> I'm going to ask the cross-compiler crowd why it would fail that test but, >> is not having the libc malloc/realloc a showstopper? Any tips are >> appreciated. >> > > If you want I can compile it using a native PowerPC :) > > > Stefan > -- Regards, Rick Walsh [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
