I thought the switch was in the relevant gmp-mparam.h, which should
depend on the arch, not the OS?

Bill.

On 22 May 2010 00:45, Jason Moxham <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Friday 21 May 2010 21:13:31 Jason Moxham wrote:
>> On Friday 21 May 2010 14:16:49 Bill Hart wrote:
>> > Regarding time frame for the release, I really hope there are plans to
>> > get mpir-2.0.1 out the door as soon as possible.
>> >
>> > I know Sage has been waiting on these gcd normalisation issues to be
>> > fixed for absolutely ages. They still use mpir-1.2.2 !!!
>> >
>> > The significant holdups I see are:
>> >
>> > * broken with gcc 4.5.0 on ia64  - probably not an MPIR bug (may have
>> > to blacklist this gcc on ia64 along with gcc 4.3.2 on all 64 bit
>> > machines)
>> > * some issue on another skynet machine - something to do with the
>> > setup of the machine
>>
>> This is the make check failure on fulvia , it appears that gcc is not set
>> up properly , I've have tried changing the flags , linker etc but could not
>> get anywhere. This is the ELFCLASS 32 error
>>
>> There is also a duplicate symbol on this platform to remove , I'll look
>> into this now
>>
>
> Under solaris on fulvia , the generic c file preinv_divrem.c gets built 
> whereas
> on linux it does not get built , somewhere in configure? there is a switch 
> that
> turns off building it when we have it in mpn_divrem_1 , but it only been done
> under (x86_64 & linux )  whereas we should have it under all x86_64 any OS not
> just linux
>
>
>
>> There is also a make tune failure on rosemary , I can't seem to find
>> rosemary , is it on skynet ?
>>
>> > * add copyi.c copyd.c to linux build (this is done by adding them to
>> > mpn_functions in configure.in and running autoconf, automake, ON
>> > BOXEN!!)
>> > * document the normalisation changes in mpir.texi (if this hasn't
>> > already been done - I forgot if I did it or not)
>> >
>> > I would focus attention on these so the release can be made.
>> >
>> > Bill.
>> >
>> > On 21 May 2010 13:07, Jason Moxham <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > On Friday 21 May 2010 07:54:49 Cactus wrote:
>> > >> On May 21, 12:24 am, Jason Moxham <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >> > On Wednesday 19 May 2010 12:49:51 Bill Hart wrote:
>> > >> > > Hi all,
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > In the past few months I've been increasingly busy with my
>> > >> > > research and looking at my calendar for the next few months (urgh
>> > >> > > is it even years), I see I am going to have not as much time as I
>> > >> > > would like to work on bignum stuff.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > I think it is time to pass on the responsibilities I've had within
>> > >> > > the project to some others.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > I'll still be available to ask stuff and I'm sure I'll be able to
>> > >> > > contribute some code from time to time.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > I understand that the 2.0.1 release is quite close and I'll still
>> > >> > > be available to help Minh through the process.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > The logical person to be in charge of linux stuff is Jason Moxham
>> > >> > > (who is also capable of making releases) and of course Brian is as
>> > >> > > always, in charge of Windows stuff. For contributions for upcoming
>> > >> > > releases, please talk to these guys. I'm sure they'll update
>> > >> > > everyone with any plans for releases as they come to light.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Bill.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > OK , I'm happy to do it.
>> > >> > From memory I believe this is what we have up and coming...
>> > >> >
>> > >> > v2.0.1 is a gcd normalization and a few minor bugletts
>> > >> >
>> > >> > v2.1.0 is a MSVC vs2010 update (assuming everything appears on time)
>> > >> >
>> > >> > There are some minor x86_64 assembler tweeks/updates , linux
>> > >> > portions ready to go , and windows versions depending on how the
>> > >> > MSVC update goes. My windows box is still in the shop so I can't do
>> > >> > the windows bit for the moment.
>> > >>
>> > >> Let me know when you add these to SVN and I'll look at doing it.
>> > >>
>> > >> When you say 'minor tweeks/updates', do you mean a few individual
>> > >> instruction changes that won't need full conversion or full 'Linux to
>> > >> Windows' assembler code conversion?
>> > >>
>> > >>     Brian
>> > >
>> > > Both , but mainly full conversion , I could do the simpler ones if I
>> > > had my windows box back from the shop , I might get it back in time
>> > > depends on what sort of time frame we expect for the release. if not we
>> > > can delay until the next release.
>> > >
>> > > Jason
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > > Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to
>> > > [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email
>> > > to [email protected]. For more options, visit
>> > > this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "mpir-devel" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"mpir-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.

Reply via email to