Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Can you verify that the configure file, when doing the whether
frexpl works
check, runs a program that includes the
/* Test on denormalized numbers. */
section?
It doesn't.
Then your configure file was built from outdated .m4 files.
Maybe your Makefiles
Hi Bruno,
On 25 Jan 2008, at 20:03, Bruno Haible wrote:
Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Can you verify that the configure file, when doing the whether
frexpl works
check, runs a program that includes the
/* Test on denormalized numbers. */
section?
It doesn't.
Then your configure file was built
Hi Bruno,
In preparation for some libtool patches against Eric's reports, I
decided to upgrade my gnulib checkout and rebuild m4 HEAD against
it.I'm on the opposite side of the planet to my ppc machine for
the next few months, but there are /\(still\|new\)/ frexpl bugs in
gnulib on
On 25 Jan 2008, at 07:12, Bruno Haible wrote:
Hi Gary,
Hallo Bruno,
Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
... upgrade my gnulib checkout and rebuild m4 HEAD against it.
... there are /\(still\|new\)/ frexpl bugs in gnulib on my intel
MacBook:
$ VERBOSE=1 make check TESTS='test-frexpl
Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
I'm not passing any special flags, so whatever is standard for the apple
shipped
build of gcc on 10.5.1. I believe that is 64 bit mode, unless I'm just
falling
for the hype...
32 bit is the default, you have to either pass -m64 or -arch x86_64 to
the compiler to get
Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Can you run the test program mentioned in [2]?
Sure:
$ gcc -o testfrexpl testfrexpl.c
$ ./testfrexpl
-16384 0.5
...
checking whether frexpl works... yes
Sorry, this makes no sense to me. The testfrexpl.c test is nearly literally
contained in the whether frexpl
