Hi Stuart,

On Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 08:35:10PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> My dev machines are updated past clang 6 so I can't test atm but it reads
> ok.

We might as well fix the build first. The below diff should do the
trick. 

I *think* I'm right to not bump.

OK for that part?

> I don't think it will do much to bulk build speeds in itself, coccinelle
> and tex-by-topic aren't parts of big dependency chains, and don't take
> that long to build, but seems a good testbed for your script which could
> well be useful for things in future that have a bigger impact on the
> build.

Agreed.

Thanks


Index: patches/patch-texk_web2c_luatexdir_image_pdftoepdf_w
===================================================================
RCS file: patches/patch-texk_web2c_luatexdir_image_pdftoepdf_w
diff -N patches/patch-texk_web2c_luatexdir_image_pdftoepdf_w
--- /dev/null   1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ patches/patch-texk_web2c_luatexdir_image_pdftoepdf_w        8 Apr 2018 
10:38:34 -0000
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+$OpenBSD$
+
+Fix C++11 build problem in generated C++ code.
+http://www.tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/2017-June/040365.html
+
+Index: texk/web2c/luatexdir/image/pdftoepdf.w
+--- texk/web2c/luatexdir/image/pdftoepdf.w.orig
++++ texk/web2c/luatexdir/image/pdftoepdf.w
+@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ static char *get_file_checksum(const char *a, file_err
+         ck = (char *) malloc(PDF_CHECKSUM_SIZE);
+         if (ck == NULL)
+             formatted_error("pdf inclusion","out of memory while processing 
'%s'", a);
+-        snprintf(ck, PDF_CHECKSUM_SIZE, "%" PRIu64 "_%" PRIu64, (uint64_t) 
size,(uint64_t) mtime);
++      snprintf(ck, PDF_CHECKSUM_SIZE, "%"@= @>PRIu64@= @>"_%"@= @>PRIu64, 
(uint64_t) size,(uint64_t) mtime);
+    } else {
+         switch (fe) {
+             case FE_FAIL:


-- 
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

Reply via email to