Re: [setup] Why does PackageSpecification have a privatecopy-constructor? (Robert?)

2004-08-31 Thread Max Bowsher
Robert Collins wrote: On Mon, 2004-08-30 at 18:33 +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: I can't see why setup's PackageSpecification class has a private copy-constructor. Am I missing something? erm. to only allow the class itself to create copies. Yes, but why was it decided to make that restriction? Either

Re: [setup] Why does PackageSpecification have a privatecopy-constructor? (Robert?)

2004-08-31 Thread Robert Collins
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 08:54 +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: So we have code like that at the moment? Certainly. 4 occurrences in IniDBBuilderPackage.cc and 1 in package_db.cc. Eh? I can't find any. We have things like setSourcePackage(PackageSpecification(name)); which at the end of the call

Re: [ITP] ocaml-3.08.1-1

2004-08-31 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 29 17:26, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/ocaml-3.08.1-1-src.tar.bz2 http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/ocaml-3.08.1-1.tar.bz2 http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/setup.hint (also inline below) Uploaded. Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen

Re: [setup] Why does PackageSpecification have a private copy-constructor? (Robert?)

2004-08-31 Thread Doctor Bill
I can't see why setup's PackageSpecification class has a private copy-constructor. Am I missing something? The reason why I am suddenly interested is that the C++ standard says that this: foo(SomeClass()) requires SomeClass's copy-constructor to be accessible (bizarre, no?) and g++

Re: [setup] Why does PackageSpecification have a private copy-constructor? (Robert?)

2004-08-31 Thread Robert Collins
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 06:17 -0400, Doctor Bill wrote: Actually, this makes perfect sense. When you do SomeClass(), without using the new operator, you are telling the compiler to create this instance on the stack, and then when you do foo(SomeClass()) you are telling the compiler to pass

Re: setup 2.427 runtime error

2004-08-31 Thread David A. Cobb
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: Did you, by chance, use wget -o? That would put the headers into the file. FWIW, I just tried this[*] with Firefox 0.9.3 -- no problems. Igor [*] By this I mean download http://cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.431.tar.bz2; No, just Firefox 0.9. Today, for the

Re: [ITP] ocaml-3.08.1-1

2004-08-31 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 10:41:18AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 29 17:26, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/ocaml-3.08.1-1-src.tar.bz2 http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/ocaml-3.08.1-1.tar.bz2 http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/setup.hint

Re: [ITP] ocaml-3.08.1-1

2004-08-31 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 31 08:53, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 10:41:18AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 29 17:26, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/ocaml-3.08.1-1-src.tar.bz2 http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/ocaml-3.08.1-1.tar.bz2

Re: [setup] Why does PackageSpecification have aprivatecopy-constructor? (Robert?)

2004-08-31 Thread Robert Collins
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 14:27 +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: Robert Collins wrote: which is public, and should be usable. See: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html#cxx_rvalbind I agree with you, but the C++ Standard and GCC 3.4 disagree with both of us. Eek. gcc 3.x have all honoured the

Re: [ITP] ocaml-3.08.1-1

2004-08-31 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 31 15:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 31 08:53, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 10:41:18AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 29 17:26, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/cygwin/ocaml/ocaml-3.08.1-1-src.tar.bz2

Re: [ITP] ocaml-3.08.1-1

2004-08-31 Thread Igor Pechtchanski
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 31 15:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 31 08:53, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 10:41:18AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 29 17:26, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:

Compiling Tcl C extension using Cygwin gcc

2004-08-31 Thread Jingzhao Ou
Dear all, I tried to compile a simple Tcl C extension using Cygwin gcc. I use the following commands: gcc -shared -ltcl -L/lib random.o I got the following error messege: random.o(.text+0x31):random.c: undefined reference to `_Tcl_WrongNumArgs' random.o(.text+0x5e):random.c: undefined

Re: Compiling Tcl C extension using Cygwin gcc

2004-08-31 Thread Igor Pechtchanski
Wrong list. Redirected. Igor On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Jingzhao Ou wrote: Dear all, I tried to compile a simple Tcl C extension using Cygwin gcc. I use the following commands: gcc -shared -ltcl -L/lib random.o I got the following error messege: random.o(.text+0x31):random.c:

Re: [setup] Why does PackageSpecification haveaprivatecopy-constructor? (Robert?)

2004-08-31 Thread Max Bowsher
Robert Collins wrote: On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 14:27 +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: Robert Collins wrote: which is public, and should be usable. See: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html#cxx_rvalbind I agree with you, but the C++ Standard and GCC 3.4 disagree with both of us. Eek. Indeed :-) gcc 3.x have all

Re: [setup] Why does PackageSpecification haveaprivatecopy-constructor? (Robert?)

2004-08-31 Thread Robert Collins
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 23:42 +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: Unless we add explicit copy-constructors to every single class, I'd rather just leave it out and let the compiler handle things implicitly? It seems cleaner to me. I think you'll find every class that has a destructor also has an

Problem with setup 2.427 under Windows 2000

2004-08-31 Thread Patrick Jones
Hi all. I am attempting to run setup.exe, version 2.427 under Windows 2000 Professional on a Toshiba laptop. After making all the setup option selections, the setup fails, with a dialog window saying 'setup.exe has been terminated by Windows. You will need to restart the program'. The first