On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 03:15:15PM -0400, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
> On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
>> in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c, is problematic on
>> older clang? The previous
On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
> in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c, is problematic on
> older clang? The previous patch that applied -O4 to the compilation of
> xgettext.c,
> should work fine
On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 11:55:10AM -0700, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> On 9/2/12 9:08 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 05:00:23PM -0400, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
> >> On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> >>> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools
I've attached putative replacement gettext-tools.info and
libgettext8-shlibs.patch that gets around the clang -O failures (in
xgettext and the format-sh-1 test).
This bumps the revision for gettext-tools since the deb is different,
although as Alexander pointed out, it might be overkill as dif
The following patch added to Jack's previously listed patch to
gettext-tools/src/Makefile.in allows all relevant tests to pass with
Xcode 4.1 (lang-rst still fails if fpc is present, but that's a separate
issue).
--- gettext-0.18.1.1/gettext-tools/src/Makefile.in.orig 2012-08-31
20:21:15.0
On 9/2/2012 12:08 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 05:00:23PM -0400, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
>> On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
>>> in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c,
On 9/2/2012 12:08 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 05:00:23PM -0400, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
>> On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
>>> in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c,
On 9/2/12 9:08 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 05:00:23PM -0400, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
>> On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
>>> in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c, is
On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 05:00:23PM -0400, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
> On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
>> in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c, is problematic on
>> older clang? The previous
On 8/31/2012 8:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
> in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c, is problematic on
> older clang? The previous patch that applied -O4 to the compilation of
> xgettext.c,
> should work fine
Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
in 10.7 branch when only a single source file, xgettext.c, is problematic on
older clang? The previous patch that applied -O4 to the compilation of
xgettext.c,
should work fine using -O0 instead for just that file.
--- gettext-0
11 matches
Mail list logo
