On Jan 30, 2008 4:08 PM, Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 30. Januar 2008 22:03 schrieb Mike Pape: > > > I've also been able to build a git-svn that passes most tests (the > > symlink/executable bit tests fail). I basically did the same things > > Christian did plus I had to do some extra tweaks. The biggest difference > > was for the created dll's, I kept getting an error from perl about not > > being able to remap to the parent process. Googling said that you needed > > to run cygwin's rebase on the dll's. Doing this fixed the problem, but > > obviously something is wrong there. Did you have this issue Christian? > > No, I didn't have this issue at all. It might be the libtool I used. I've set up scripts to build libtool, zlib, and swig. I'll see if the correct libtool makes a difference. > > > > I also used a different libtool (from gnuwin32) instead of building the > > latest to save time. > > Building the libtool takes about 5% of the time of building subversion, so > this shouldn't hinder you. > > > > As for building subversion, that was the hardest part. I built zlib, apr, > > apr-util, and neon separately with minor tweaks to the LDFLAGS so that I > > wasn't getting static linking. I installed each one as it was built. > > I thought LDFLAGS="-no-undefined" was the most important part that switched to > shared libraries. All other LDFLAGS parts shouldn't influence the static vs. > shared decision. The problem was things like building apr-util complained of undefined references to apr pieces. Did you build all the deps from the subversion directory or each dep by itself? > > Regards, > > Christian > Mike
