Re: [libtool-2.2.2] testsuite on NFS mount on AIX

2008-04-21 Thread Michael Haubenwallner
On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 09:29 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: On Sat, 2008-04-19 at 18:40 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hello Michael, * Michael Haubenwallner wrote on Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 04:59:43PM CEST: when doing the libtool testsuite in some NFS mounted directory on AIX,

Re: libtool performance status

2008-04-21 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: If they were lower in between, and since increased, there must have been at least one regression along the way. Can you use git bisect to identify one? Remember that you fixed an expr-related bug which was impacting FreeBSD and causing an error

FYI - Use AC_CHECK_TOOL for lipo too.

2008-04-21 Thread Peter O'Gorman
Hi, I just pushed this. Peter -- Peter O'Gorman http://pogma.com From 39903a5836fc563e83fe6aa614d75a2a3ebe04fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter O'Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:21:27 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Use AC_CHECK_TOOL for lipo too. * libltdl/m4/libtool.m4

Re: [PATCH 363] Allow better compile time type checking for lt_dladvise

2008-04-21 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Does this work with C and C++ compilers? Does it change the ABI or API? If yes, no, then I like it. Otherwise, as nice as it is, it would be a bit inappropriate for a minor release number, no? I use this approach in GraphicsMagick C code without

Re: FYI - Use AC_CHECK_TOOL for lipo too.

2008-04-21 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Peter O'Gorman wrote: Hi, I just pushed this. Since the full patch appears on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, perhaps it is not necessary to manually duplicate already committed patches on this list? What are the official rules regarding when the patch must be posted to

Re: FYI - Use AC_CHECK_TOOL for lipo too.

2008-04-21 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Bob, * Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 07:25:10PM CEST: Since the full patch appears on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, perhaps it is not necessary to manually duplicate already committed patches on this list? It's an idea. However, those commit messages - don't allow to add

Re: darwin fat binary support bugfix

2008-04-21 Thread Peter O'Gorman
Peter O'Gorman wrote: I will fix, and even apply the (non-failing) test tomorrow. Making the test fail is better. Ok? Peter -- Peter O'Gorman http://pogma.com From d9a4d8f71ae415bb716dc8267a506a102bacf0b2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter O'Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008

Re: darwin fat binary support bugfix

2008-04-21 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hi Peter, On 21 Apr 2008, at 16:20, Peter O'Gorman wrote: Peter O'Gorman wrote: I will fix, and even apply the (non-failing) test tomorrow. Making the test fail is better. Ok? Looks good to me. Please apply. Peter -- Peter O'Gorman http://pogma.com From

Re: libtool performance status

2008-04-21 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 05:14:00PM CEST: On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: If they were lower in between, and since increased, there must have been at least one regression along the way. Can you use git bisect to identify one? Remember that you fixed an