Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: I just pushed an LD_LIBRARY_PATH improvement, we'll see if it reduces the number of failures. We should see already tomorrow morning (altough it takes 6 days for all configs to run without manual intervention). There are currently 10 outstanding

Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

t...@gmplib.org (Torbjörn Granlund) writes: > ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: > I don't think so. But I think the right way is to simply add $(CFLAGS) > to the linker command line. That's the usual way to use it, right? And > omitting it in the linking rule in

Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

Marc Glisse writes: > The first failure was also a bit interesting, an internal compiler error > with gcc-6. > > In file included from gmp/mini-gmp/tests/testutils.c:24:0: > gmp/mini-gmp/tests/../mini-gmp.c: In function 'mpz_set_d': >

Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: To make sure I understand the issue, this is to get flags like -m32 passed on to the linker? Almost. It passes it to the compiler used for invoking the linker, which then munges it and DTRT. > I am not sure there are no side-effects

Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016, Niels Möller wrote: I don't think so. But I think the right way is to simply add $(CFLAGS) to the linker command line. That's the usual way to use it, right? That's a common hack (that I am ok with), but I don't think I would call it "the right way"... The first

Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

t...@gmplib.org (Torbjörn Granlund) writes: > I made that and another change to now get the test to run on the > majority of our systems. The other change was this one: > > https://gmplib.org/repo/gmp/rev/88fead579828 > > This makes sure linking knows the ABI. To make sure I understand the