#3358: [with patch, needs work] Improve the building of eclib (shared/static
objects)
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Reporter: fbissey | Owner: mabshoff
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-3.2.2
Component: build | Resolution:
Keywords: editor_mabshoff |
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Comment (by fbissey):
Hi guys,
I am a bit out of action at the moment but I should comment on what I
had done and why.
Replying to [comment:9 mabshoff]:
> I think there are some issues with eclib-ungnu.patch:
>
> * the formal changes, i.e. the removal of the ".o" from the makefiles
should be independent of the other changes for reviewing purposes
I reviewed my patch and the removal of the ".o" and its inclusion in
$(OBJ_SUF) and $(SOBJ_SUF) was needed to write a working ".SUFFIXES:"
old unix style rule and keep putting "_n" in the object. It can be
simplified
if we remove it. It is a remnant of the various building options that
weren't
used in sage but could be restored with a bit of creativity and some
environment
variables.
> * some of the fixes will have the makefiles as is working with Sage,
but if anyone attempted to compile eclib without explicitly setting env
variables like NTL the compile will break or the build will not include
features like pari support. I don't care which way we go here, but this is
up to John since it is his code project.
>
The behavior before and after the patch is currently the same if you
don't set any variables. It defaults to look for stuff in /usr/local .
Either you do some autodetection or you pass variables. It probably
should be documented in a README.
> As is the patch needs to be rebased slighly:
> {{{
> /eclib-20080310.p7/src$ patch -p1 --dry-run < eclib-
ungnu.patch\?format\=raw
> patching file Makefile
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 45.
> 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej
> patching file Makefile.dynamic
> patching file g0n/Makefile
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 25 with fuzz 2.
> patching file procs/Makefile
> Hunk #2 FAILED at 23.
> 1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file procs/Makefile.rej
> patching file qcurves/Makefile
> patching file qrank/Makefile
> }}}
>
I'll have a look and rebase it if that's all it takes.
> I am -1 on all the other three patches at this ticket. Some of those
might be salvaged, i.e. from the spkg-install patches like the better
installation, but the PIC->pic change is just plain wrong.
>
The two first patches are really obsolete in many ways. And yes, after
doing
some growing up I realise PIC->pic is wrong for something like sage. It is
debatable that it could be selected appropriately at the start of the
building
process but that wouldn't be KISS.
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
Cheers,
Francois
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3358#comment:11>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage - Open Source Mathematical Software: Building the Car Instead of
Reinventing the Wheel
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" 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/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
