Hi Charles, Bruno,
* Charles Wilson wrote on Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 07:34:56AM CEST:
>
> Attached. Re-ran *all* of the tests described here:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2007-04/msg00073.html
> with identical results.
Thank you for patching and testing, and thanks to Bruno f
Charles Wilson wrote:
I'll generate and
test an additional patch addressing Bruno's concerns.
Attached. Re-ran *all* of the tests described here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2007-04/msg00073.html
with identical results.
I did not bump the argz.m4 serial again (I'm not su
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:57:13 +0200, "Bruno Haible" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Lots of good comments...snipped]
As I was the originator of this change (though not its final form), and
because Ralf has already committed it to libtool cvs, I'll generate and
test an additional patch addressing Bruno's conc
Hi Ralf,
A bit of gnitpicking:
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Here's what the gnulib patch looks like.
> + set x `uname -r | $SED -e 's/^\([[0-9\.]]*\).*/\1/'`
$SED is usually not defined in the context of autoconf macros that are
part of gnulib. (I.e. it expands to empty.) Just use 'sed' in
[ http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.libtool.patches/7314/focus=7498 ]
Thanks Charles for all your work on this. I installed this path into
Libtool HEAD, and pulled the changes over to gnulib. Here's what the
gnulib patch looks like.
Cheers,
Ralf
2007-04-25 Charles Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECT
* Charles Wilson wrote on Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:53:47AM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
>> +AS_IF([test -z "$ARGZ_H"],
>> +[AC_CACHE_CHECK(
>> +[if argz actually works],
>> +[lt_cv_sys_argz_works],
>> +[case $host_os in #(
>
> I like this trick. Fixes syntax highligh
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Charles Wilson wrote on Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:25:27AM CEST:
Ralf suggests testing this patch on solaris. I can't, but if Ralf does then
I expect that the results will be the same as (4) and (5).
Done.
AS_CASE was a problem, as it's not in Autoconf-2.59.
!!! I co
* Charles Wilson wrote on Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:25:27AM CEST:
> Ralf suggests testing this patch on solaris. I can't, but if Ralf does then
> I expect that the results will be the same as (4) and (5).
Done.
AS_CASE was a problem, as it's not in Autoconf-2.59. While fixing, I
noted that we can
Charles Wilson wrote:
Under case (1), currently running the new-style testsuite. Will report
that later in a follow-up message. I expect the following:
14: Java convenience archives FAILED (convenience.at:273)
16: Link order of deplibs. FAILED (link-order2.at:129)
49: Run tes
Hopefully the attached patch addresses all comments...Recapping:
The argz functions (specifically, argz_insert) supplied by cygwin are
buggy, in wierd use-dependent malloc-related ways. I've already
submitted a patch to newlib to fix that error which has been accepted
http://sourceware.org/
* Charles Wilson wrote on Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 08:08:41PM CEST:
> >
> >>--- libltdl/m4/argz.m4 25 Mar 2006 11:05:02 - 1.3
> >>+++ libltdl/m4/argz.m4 17 Mar 2007 06:09:50 -
> >[...]
> >>+os_ver=$(uname -r | $SED -e 's,^\([[0123456789\.]]*\).*,\1,')
> >>+
* Charles Wilson wrote on Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 08:08:41PM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> >It's a good choice of testing, and should be done again with the final
> >patch. Plus one test on Solaris with its /bin/sh. (Just noting this,
> >I can probably do these tests then.)
>
> will do for l
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Charles Wilson wrote:
This is because the test is just too ugly for words, not to mention
brittle. Trying to tease out malloc issues outside of a dedicated malloc
testsuite is just plain silly.
I think the biggest problem with the previous patch was that it was
relyin
Hi Charles,
* Charles Wilson wrote on Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 03:02:08AM CEST:
>
> This is because the test is just too ugly for words, not to mention
> brittle. Trying to tease out malloc issues outside of a dedicated malloc
> testsuite is just plain silly.
I think the biggest problem with the pr
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
[snip long description of ugly runtime test]
See
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2007-03/msg00030.html
After discussion with Bob F, I've reimplemented this fix without the
actual runtime test. Instead, if $ho
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
[snip long description of ugly runtime test]
See
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2007-03/msg00030.html
After discussion with Bob F, I've reimplemented this fix without the actual
runtime test. Instead, if $host_os is cygwin, and cyg
Charles Wilson wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
I'll whip up a patch and post it to the newlib list.
So, I posted the following:
http://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2007/msg00271.html
However, there's no telling how long it'll be before a new cygwin
kernel is released that inc
Charles Wilson wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
I'll whip up a patch and post it to the newlib list.
So, I posted the following:
http://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2007/msg00271.html
However, there's no telling how long it'll be before a new cygwin kernel
is released that includes the patch, and be
Charles Wilson wrote:
I'll whip up a patch and post it to the newlib list.
So, I posted the following:
http://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2007/msg00271.html
However, there's no telling how long it'll be before a new cygwin kernel
is released that includes the patch, and besides, libtool ought to
Well, once I got the cygwin1.dbg stuff worked out, it was pretty easy to
track down: it is a bug in newlib's argz_insert:
Charles Wilson wrote:
Here's the code from newlib's argz_insert:
error_t
_DEFUN (argz_insert, (argz, argz_len, before, entry),
char **argz _AND
size_t *argz_l
On 16 March 2007 15:35, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Well, it's failing all the time for me, but I'm not sure it's a >
>>> segfault. What does "Hangup" mean, when reported by the shell after >
>>> executing the app: Good question, I don't know.
It means SIGHUP.
> I've (almost) tracked down the
21 matches
Mail list logo
