Thank you, Dirk, for keeping me in the loop. I'm happy if you test to see if the change works.
As a matter of fact, I think a slightly different patch should be used rather than the one proposed. Given what I've learned in the meantime, I think I'd rather use Index: src/main/arithmetic.c =================================================================== --- src/main/arithmetic.c (Revision 77566) +++ src/main/arithmetic.c (Arbeitskopie) @@ -176,8 +176,12 @@ #endif } + #if HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE && (SIZEOF_LONG_DOUBLE > SIZEOF_DOUBLE) -static LDOUBLE q_1_eps = 1 / LDBL_EPSILON; +# ifndef __PPC64__ +static // PowerPC 64 (when gcc has -mlong-double-128) breaks when 'static' (gcc bug, there) +# endif + LDOUBLE q_1_eps = 1 / LDBL_EPSILON; #else static double q_1_eps = 1 / DBL_EPSILON; #endif which would keep PowerPC 64 to use the high precision epsilon here, rather than the one to use when there is no long double present. Martin On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 3:43 PM Sebastien Bacher <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le 16/12/2019 à 15:23, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : > > Can you remind if/how I could get shell access to PowerPC to test? > > https://wiki.debian.org/PorterBoxHowToUse should have the details needed > > Seems like the ppc boxes have restricted access though... > > I can test a patch/package on an Ubuntu porter box if that's useful > -- Martin <[email protected]> https://stat.ethz.ch/~maechler Seminar für Statistik, ETH Zürich HG G 16 Rämistrasse 101 CH-8092 Zurich, SWITZERLAND phone: +41-44-632-3408 fax: ...-1228 <><
