[I'm going to try to only respond to the technical sides of this]
On 2012-10-09 22:51, Roumen Petrov wrote:
> Peter Rosin wrote:
>> On 2012-10-08 23:29, Roumen Petrov wrote:
>>> Peter Rosin wrote:
Hi Roumen,
On 2012-10-07 11:37, Roumen Petrov wrote:
> And now test fail in cross
On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Roumen Petrov wrote:
You just point that you lack basic knowledge and experience with libtool
test suite .
With recent commits you just ask you commit privileges to be revoked due lack
of background knowledge
Peter, I hop that after 10 years you will reach level of Ral
Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2012-10-08 23:29, Roumen Petrov wrote:
Peter Rosin wrote:
Hi Roumen,
On 2012-10-07 11:37, Roumen Petrov wrote:
And now test fail in cross environment : linux for mingw host
Thanks for the report!
I have pushed this. Let me know if it doesn't help.
No comment.
Thank y
On 2012-10-08 23:29, Roumen Petrov wrote:
> Peter Rosin wrote:
>> Hi Roumen,
>>
>> On 2012-10-07 11:37, Roumen Petrov wrote:
>>> And now test fail in cross environment : linux for mingw host
>> Thanks for the report!
>>
>> I have pushed this. Let me know if it doesn't help.
>
> No comment.
Thank
Peter Rosin wrote:
Hi Roumen,
On 2012-10-07 11:37, Roumen Petrov wrote:
And now test fail in cross environment : linux for mingw host
Thanks for the report!
I have pushed this. Let me know if it doesn't help.
No comment.
Ralf wrote so good code I cannot understand any Peter's patches.
Why
Hi Roumen,
On 2012-10-07 11:37, Roumen Petrov wrote:
> And now test fail in cross environment : linux for mingw host
Thanks for the report!
I have pushed this. Let me know if it doesn't help.
>From 0f31e375104b00a181557d3809e556066b3d98b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Rosin
Date: Mon, 8
Peter Rosin wrote:
[SNIP]
That part of mdemo now works, thanks!
But that said, I'm about to push this revert of one of the line
ending "fixes" that was masked by this orthogonal problem.
Cheers,
Peter
From b78fd9740ef6a2ed67a1ef14e76483af784fb5f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Rosin
D
On 2012-10-06 07:58, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 6 Oct 2012, at 06:20, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> Over to mdemo.at. It fails on MinGW because I do not have
>> any installed libltdl in MinGW. Temporarily moving the
>> installed Cygwin libltdl out of the lib search path makes
>> the test f
On 2012-10-06 10:13, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> On 6 Oct 2012, at 14:05, "Gary V. Vaughan" wrote:
> Scratch that, on closer inspection there are a couple of thinkos and
> portable quoting errors in the original port of quote.test to Autotest.
>
>> I'll push if you can confirm that it fixes the test
On 2012-10-06 06:32, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> I'm about to push these changes. Please let me know
> whether it fixes your fortran test failures -- It'll take
> me a few more days to find the time to build a Windows test
> environment.
The fortran tests are fine now. Thanks!
Cheers,
Peter
On 6 Oct 2012, at 14:05, "Gary V. Vaughan" wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 6 Oct 2012, at 06:20, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> And lastly libtool.at. It is only \' that is a problem. If I take
>> that char out of the backslashified list, the test is ok.
>> Another data point is that if I replace the grep on
Hi Peter,
On 6 Oct 2012, at 06:20, Peter Rosin wrote:
> And lastly libtool.at. It is only \' that is a problem. If I take
> that char out of the backslashified list, the test is ok.
> Another data point is that if I replace the grep on line 110 like
> this:
> -LT_AT_CHECK([$EGREP
> "$mode:.*$mat
Hi Peter,
On 6 Oct 2012, at 06:20, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Over to mdemo.at. It fails on MinGW because I do not have
> any installed libltdl in MinGW. Temporarily moving the
> installed Cygwin libltdl out of the lib search path makes
> the test fail on Cygwin as well. So, I believe this is
> a gener
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the other fixes.
On 6 Oct 2012, at 06:20, Peter Rosin wrote:
> My guess is that f77demo.at and fcdemo.at fails because of
> different stdio streams in their mixed mode programs.
>
> Tests 159 and 162 (static library) fails because different
> parts of the output has differe
On 10/5/2012 2:28 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
I
wouldn't recommend that anyone start with XP these days since it is 12
years old, patched beyond all repair, and quickly becoming defunct.
Seconded. A virtual machine with "stock" XP will need several full days
of running "Windows Update" to bring
On 10/5/2012 12:03 PM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> And thanks for looking into it. Is there a legal way to get access
> to Windows and the various flavours of gcc and MSVC that libtool users
> care about, without spending hundreds of dollars on software I would
> never use for anything else?
Yes.
Hi Bob,
On 6 ต.ค. 2012, at 1:28, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Oct 2012, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>>
>> I actually run a lot of virtual machines on my Mac, including a couple
>> of versions of Mac OS and Linux, and I certainly wouldn't want to
>> squander perfectly good hardware on an OS that
On 2012-10-05 22:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
> The remaining fallout is libtool.at, mdemo.at, f77demo.at and fcdemo.at.
> I'll see what I can dig out...
My guess is that f77demo.at and fcdemo.at fails because of
different stdio streams in their mixed mode programs.
Tests 159 and 162 (static library) f
On 2012-10-05 18:03, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Apologies for having entirely forgotten about the old thread reviewing
> those patches first time around.
>
> And thanks for looking into it. Is there a legal way to get access
> to Windows and the various flavours of gcc and MSVC that
On Sat, 6 Oct 2012, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
I actually run a lot of virtual machines on my Mac, including a couple
of versions of Mac OS and Linux, and I certainly wouldn't want to
squander perfectly good hardware on an OS that I don't use, and wasn't
aware of the 180 days trials, so I'll take a
Hi Eric,
On 5 Oct 2012, at 23:42, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/05/2012 10:03 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>> Is there a legal way to get access
>> to Windows and the various flavours of gcc and MSVC that libtool users
>> care about, without spending hundreds of dollars on software I would
>> never use
On 10/05/2012 10:03 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Apologies for having entirely forgotten about the old thread reviewing
> those patches first time around.
>
> And thanks for looking into it. Is there a legal way to get access
> to Windows and the various flavours of gcc and MSVC th
Hi Peter,
Apologies for having entirely forgotten about the old thread reviewing
those patches first time around.
And thanks for looking into it. Is there a legal way to get access
to Windows and the various flavours of gcc and MSVC that libtool users
care about, without spending hundreds of dol
23 matches
Mail list logo