Another option is to look inside the patch and find the svn revision number. Do a svn update -r revno to get matching code.
Is there a possibility that patch has been replaced by newer one? mick On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 13:29, Padraig Kitterick <[email protected]> wrote: > > I doubt it. Check out each of the hunks that failed - the patch was just > probably against a slightly different version of ceval.c. You may be > able to apply them manually... > > Daniel Kersten wrote: >> Apologies for spamming the list.. >> >> Since the patch could not be applied 100%, I assume thats why I don't >> see any difference. Do I need to aply any others? In a specific order? >> >> Dan. >> >> 2009/1/9 Daniel Kersten <[email protected]>: >> >>> I don't think it worked. Theres no real difference when running >>> pybench and my own code runs the same as before. Pity. (PS: this is >>> with the svn version of python) >>> >>> 2009/1/9 Daniel Kersten <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Ok, part of the patch failed, but I reapplied it and it builds now. I >>>> think I applied it BEFORE running ./configure, so the Makefile was >>>> wrong. At least, I guess that was the problem. >>>> >>>> Now, I guess I need to benchmark to see if it worked regardless of the >>>> patching errors.. >>>> >>>> Thanks for the help though!! >>>> >>>> Dan. >>>> >>>> 2009/1/9 Daniel Kersten <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Ok, tried applying patch to both 2.6.1 and svn versions: >>>>> >>>>> dan-desktop ~/Desktop/python/release26-maint: patch -p1 < >>>>> threadedceval5.patch >>>>> patching file Makefile.pre.in >>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 248 (offset 1 line). >>>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 578 with fuzz 2 (offset 4 lines). >>>>> patching file Python/ceval.c >>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 578 (offset -3 lines). >>>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 752 (offset -2 lines). >>>>> Hunk #3 succeeded at 1061 (offset -71 lines). >>>>> Hunk #4 succeeded at 1119 (offset -71 lines). >>>>> Hunk #5 succeeded at 1136 (offset -71 lines). >>>>> Hunk #6 FAILED at 1148. >>>>> Hunk #7 FAILED at 1263. >>>>> Hunk #8 FAILED at 1424. >>>>> ... <more text> >>>>> 15 out of 50 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Python/ceval.c.rej >>>>> patching file Python/makeopcodetargets.py >>>>> patching file Python/opcode_targets.h >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Also, the script Python/makeopcodetargets.py exists and runs fine >>>>> (generates the file Python/opcode_targets.h), but some of the >>>>> generated opcodes STILL give "undefined" errors. >>>>> Since it uses a gcc specific extension, perhaps it is not recognizing >>>>> the labels as constants? Though, I assume the patch would enable it >>>>> and I AM using gcc after all. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2009/1/8 Padraig Kitterick <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> You want: >>>>>> >>>>>> patch -p1 < threadedceval5.patch >>>>>> >>>>>> Padraig >>>>>> >>>>>> Daniel Kersten wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hrm, thats strange.. it SAYS it was applied correctly.. i think.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2009/1/8 Padraig Kitterick <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That script is created by the patch, so if you don't see it then the >>>>>>>> patch hasn't applied correctly. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Daniel Kersten wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I did something like: patch -p1 Makefile < threadedceval5.patch >>>>>>>>> Also, I don't have that script. Where do I get it, I don't see it >>>>>>>>> anywhere. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It makes sense that they would have used the svn version - I used >>>>>>>>> 2.6.1 sources found on the python.org download page. I'll try the svn >>>>>>>>> version tomorrow and see. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2009/1/8 Michael Twomey <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Also, off the top of my head, I bet these are patches against svn, >>>>>>>>>> which probably means to need to run autoconf & co to regenerate >>>>>>>>>> configure and the makefiles. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mick >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 17:11, Padraig Kitterick >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Those labels that are undefined should be generated as part of the >>>>>>>>>>> make >>>>>>>>>>> rules that the patch inserts >>>>>>>>>>> ($(srcdir)/Python/makeopcodetargets.py). >>>>>>>>>>> How did you apply the patch? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Daniel Kersten wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi again, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Has anyone got any experience applying the threaded code patch to >>>>>>>>>>>> Python 2.6? >>>>>>>>>>>> http://bugs.python.org/issue4753 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently it changes the eval loop to uses threaded code instead >>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>> table lookups or something like that and can make the interpreter >>>>>>>>>>>> execute 10-20% faster on most platforms. Only works in gcc because >>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>> requires gcc's labels as values extension. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, I'm trying to get this working and have applied the >>>>>>>>>>>> threadedceval5.patch patch. I don't really know much about >>>>>>>>>>>> diff/patch, >>>>>>>>>>>> so maybe I'm doing it wrong.. I'm not sure if I need the other >>>>>>>>>>>> files >>>>>>>>>>>> or what. The patch seems to have worked fine, but when compiling >>>>>>>>>>>> Python (2.6.1) I get this error: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/ceval.c: In function 'PyEval_EvalFrameEx': >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/ceval.c:1057: error: '_Py_TracingPossible' undeclared (first >>>>>>>>>>>> use in this function) >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/ceval.c:1057: error: (Each undeclared identifier is >>>>>>>>>>>> reported only once >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/ceval.c:1057: error: for each function it appears in.) >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/opcode_targets.h:149: error: label 'TARGET_MAP_ADD' used >>>>>>>>>>>> but not defined >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/opcode_targets.h:148: error: label 'TARGET_SET_ADD' used >>>>>>>>>>>> but not defined >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/opcode_targets.h:147: error: label 'TARGET_LIST_APPEND' used >>>>>>>>>>>> but not defined >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/opcode_targets.h:136: error: label 'TARGET_MAKE_CLOSURE' >>>>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>>>> but not defined >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/opcode_targets.h:134: error: label 'TARGET_MAKE_FUNCTION' >>>>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>>>> but not defined >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/opcode_targets.h:132: error: label 'TARGET_RAISE_VARARGS' >>>>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>>>> but not defined >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> followed by more undefined labels. >>>>>>>>>>>> Python/opcode_targets.h is just a big table of opcodes, the opcodes >>>>>>>>>>>> being the TARGET_* labels, but they don't seem to be defined any >>>>>>>>>>>> place. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Has anyone successfully got this working? If yes, what am I doing >>>>>>>>>>>> wrong? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!! >>>>>>>>>>>> Dan. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Daniel Kersten. >>>>> Leveraging dynamic paradigms since the synergies of 1985. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Daniel Kersten. >>>> Leveraging dynamic paradigms since the synergies of 1985. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel Kersten. >>> Leveraging dynamic paradigms since the synergies of 1985. >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Python Ireland" 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.ie/group/pythonireland?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
