On 14 January 2011 19:06, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu>wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:45 AM, mark florisson > <markflorisso...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 14 January 2011 12:31, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> > >> wrote: > >> > Robert Bradshaw, 14.01.2011 12:12: > >> >> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:11 AM, mark florisson wrote: > >> >>> On 14 January 2011 12:08, mark florisson wrote: > >> >>>> On 14 January 2011 12:06, Stefan Behnel wrote: > >> >>>>> The build complains because it cannot find a file called > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Cython/Debugger/do_repeat.pyx > >> >>>> > >> >>> Apparently something left that should have been removed, apologies. > >> >>> You can > >> >>> remove it from the setup.py in the list on line 104. > >> >> > >> >> Done. > >> > > >> > Ok, that looks better. > >> > > >> > Now that the debugger support is an official feature, should we have a > >> > Hudson job that builds Cython and all tests with gdb support enabled? > >> > >> Yes, that would make sense. We'd have to build our own newer gdb of > >> course, and a debug version of Python. > >> > >> - Robert > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Cython-dev mailing list > >> Cython-dev@codespeak.net > >> http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev > > > > That would be great. In that case, is it possible that my branch will > make > > it to Hudson? Otherwise Hudson will only be useful after merging into > > mainline, which is probably just a few hours or days before the release. > In > > any case it would also help prevent for instance the issue we had now > where > > my branch did introduce a problem just before the release (in the future > I > > will run the full test suite instead of skipping some of them with those > > options to runtests.py). If that's a hassle I wouldn't mind mainline > branch > > access either, I promise I'll be good :) > > I've read enough of your code that I think that'd be fine. I think it > makes sense to have a separate branch for the debugger stuff so things > could be caught before merging. > > > The important thing is Python with debug symbols, it does not necessarily > > have to be a debug build. The thing is that at least many Linux distros > ship > > debug symbols with the debug build (usually Python is compiled with -g, > but > > then stripped). This is for instance the case in Ubuntu (and probably > > Debian). However, in Fedora for instance even the debug build is shipped > > without symbols, and they need to be installed separately. > > We build our own Pythons, so could include debug symbols in them. > Other than that, is the only requirement to have a working gdb >= 7.2 > in the path somewhere? Yes. And gdb must be build with Python support, but I believe that that's the default. > - Robert > _______________________________________________ > Cython-dev mailing list > Cython-dev@codespeak.net > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev >
_______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list Cython-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
