hello!
after seeing a rash of win32 build problems, i decided to look into what
is going on. one problem i noticed in the emails was Configure.pl was
being run twice. once by the user (as expected), and once by nmake. the
reason is quiet cute:
when Configure.pl is run, it copies
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 03:51:37AM -0500, Lee Berger wrote:
that brings me to the next problem: string.c. there are a slew of
compile errors in this file, and it all is based on pointer math on void
pointers. for example, STRING has a void* bufstart member, and various
functions (like
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 12:51:32PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Could I suggest that for gcc we turn on maximal bitchiness, /please/
-Wall, -W and everything even bitchier still that we can get away with.
You are, of course, correct. gcc is a lot laxer than many other compilers,
so we want to
At 13:36 on 12/31/2001 GMT, Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are, of course, correct. gcc is a lot laxer than many other compilers,
so we want to get away with as little as possible. -Wall should be default
for gcc. (And please remember that not every compiler supports -Wall, so
At 01:36 PM 12/31/2001 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 12:51:32PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Could I suggest that for gcc we turn on maximal bitchiness, /please/
-Wall, -W and everything even bitchier still that we can get away with.
You are, of course, correct. gcc is a
At 03:21 PM 12/31/2001 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 09:50:08AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I committed a patch yesterday that forces -Wall for gcc builds. If that's
not cranky enough, give me a list of more gcc switches and I'll add 'em
into the list.
I'd be very
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 03:21:38PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 09:50:08AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I committed a patch yesterday that forces -Wall for gcc builds. If that's
not cranky enough, give me a list of more gcc switches and I'll add 'em
into the list.
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 10:02:19AM -0500, Josh Wilmes wrote:
At 13:36 on 12/31/2001 GMT, Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are, of course, correct. gcc is a lot laxer than many other compilers,
so we want to get away with as little as possible. -Wall should be default
for gcc.
At 03:55 PM 12/31/2001 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Shall I submit a patch that makes Configure.pl check the the C compiler works
and if it's gcc (by compiling a test program that looks for gcc's version
macros, rather than trying to pass the output of ${cc} --version)
And the if it's gcc in the
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:03:38AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Yes, please. This'll catch the systems based on GCC (like the Mac OS X
compiler) that don't look like that in Config.pm
I was just about to complain that my perl was built with cc, which is
a symlink to gcc.
--
Resist the urge to
At 04:10 PM 12/31/2001 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:03:38AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Yes, please. This'll catch the systems based on GCC (like the Mac OS X
compiler) that don't look like that in Config.pm
I was just about to complain that my perl was built with cc,
At 04:39 PM 12/31/2001 +0100, Thomas Wouters wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 03:21:38PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 09:50:08AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I committed a patch yesterday that forces -Wall for gcc builds. If
that's
not cranky enough, give me a list of
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:03:38AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Yes, please. This'll catch the systems based on GCC (like the Mac OS X
compiler) that don't look like that in Config.pm
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 10:39:54AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Folks,
I've just made a few minor changes to
At 06:23 PM 12/31/2001 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Patch appended, new gcc test program attached.
Hopefully this is a the right style of doing things.
It's good enough for now. I'm testing it now--when it's done I'll commit this.
Dan
-
From: Lee Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 12:51 AM
Subject: recent win32 build errors
hello!
after seeing a rash of win32 build problems, i decided to look into what
is going on. one problem i noticed in the emails was Configure.pl was
being run
At 12:06 PM 12/31/2001 -0800, Jason Diamond wrote:
Attached is a small patch to Configure.pl that touches platform.h and
platform.c so that Configure.pl isn't run a second time when you do a make.
This doesn't fix Win32's build problems but it makes it less annoying trying
to figure out the cause
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:17:38AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
[ Me: Don't use -Werror! ]
We'll burn those bridges when we get to them. Right now I want to clean up
all the errors our code throws because of these.
Of course, as long as it appears in the development code, it's fine. It's
not
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is jogging my memory some. Jarkko passed on his gcc switch list
from hell to me a while back--let me dig it out and add them in.
This is *not* going to be pretty for the next few days...
Here are some notes on what I've managed to live with:
##
18 matches
Mail list logo
