Roumen Petrov added the comment:
Proposed patch is mostly for cross compilation in general. Now this is
implemented differently and I think that all proposed updates are already
addressed.
Also I can not see relation with gcc( mingw ) builds.
What about to close issue as fixed ?
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys added the comment:
yeah, whatever.
(only 7 years to close an issue. Yay for open-source.)
--
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
Changes by wrobell wrob...@pld-linux.org:
--
nosy: +wrobell
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing
Changes by Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org:
--
nosy: -gregory.p.smith
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
___
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
versions: +Python 3.3 -3rd party, Python 3.2
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
Changes by Alexis Metaireau ale...@notmyidea.org:
--
nosy: +alexis
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
versions: +3rd party
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Roumen Petrov bugtr...@roumenpetrov.info added the comment:
-1 for the patch (after review of cross-3.0-0.7.diff) :
1) AC_CHECK_TOOLS(CC,gcc cc) and AC_CHECK_TOOLS(CXX,g++ c++) is bogus
2) $CC -dumpmachine when is added AC_CANONICAL_HOST is bogus
3) if (strcmp(buffe,me) 123)) is buggy
Good
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Distutils is normally frozen for new features, but in this case the changes are
small and useful enough to warrant an exception in my opinion (provided the
patch is ported to 3.2 and gets a positive review). Tarek, do you agree?
--
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc amaur...@gmail.com added the comment:
the changes are small
which patch are you referring to? They look quite large to me.
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
cross-3.0-0.7.diff only changes a few lines in build_ext. I was specifically
talking only about distutils changes.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
For cross-3.0-0.7.diff, we would need a real name and a contributor agreement.
Of course, attribution is muddy here; this literally goes back to sraue's
patch, which in turn goes back to scott.tsai's patch.
I'm still uncertain what it is
Changes by Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org:
--
nosy: +gregory.p.smith
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
___
Joshua Kinard ku...@gentoo.org added the comment:
Anyone gotten farther on getting Python-2.5.x to cross-compile? I'm
trying to get x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -- mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu, and
after some hacking at the last updated cross-2.5.1.patch, plus a fix for
the %zd printf bugaboo, plus adding
n03702 [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
There is port of cross-2.6-0.7.diff patch for python 3.0 final
--
nosy: +n03702
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file12252/cross-3.0-0.7.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stephan Raue [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
when i crosscompile Python 2.6 with Patch cross-2.6-0.7.diff which is
based on cross-2.5.1.patch i become follow error:
ld -s -fno-strict-aliasing -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-
prototypes -I. -IInclude -I./Include
rwmjones [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Just to clarify, in the MinGW case we are interested in:
build = Fedora Linux, usually i386 or x86-64 (but not always)
host = Windows i386
We can, to a limited extent, run the host binaries on the
build system, using Wine (the Windows emulator).
Roumen Petrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Hi rwmjones,
Please, could you test patch from issue3871 - python modules are build
as setup.py is run from python found on the build system. So I don't
expect issue with ppc and sparc. Minor issue is pgen.exe - work around
touch grammar files.
Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I'm still interested in this, but the last time I did anything, I jumped
through all the hoops (see conversation here), and not a single change
was put into trunk. I'm not very enthousiastic about spending a lot time
on this again.
Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
@Luke
the compiling strategy for Python (IIRC) is to compile everything,
including modules that will never work, and use compiler errors as a
signal to not include a module in the result.
this is what I end up with for 2.4
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
the compiling strategy for Python (IIRC) is to compile everything,
including modules that will never work, and use compiler errors as a
signal to not include a module in the result.
I don't think this can work in the cross-compilation
Roumen Petrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I found the patch cross-2.5.1.patch as too limited.
I'm interesting in this topic and I post patch in issue3871 that
continue work from issue841454 and issue1412448.
--
nosy: +rpetrov
___
Python
Roumen Petrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Martin meaning of target and host is different.
There is no reason to use Canadian Cross: build-host-target.
It is about more simple cross-compilation case: build-host.
About loading of modules in build environment: some OS-es can run
binaries
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Martin meaning of target and host is different.
There is no reason to use Canadian Cross: build-host-target.
It is about more simple cross-compilation case: build-host.
Terminology issues aside, I hope people still will understand my
Roumen Petrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Now in mingw case the common is python posix build system.
If the cross-compilation work what is problem to build in native
environment? Personally I prefer to build in cross environment. It is
convenient.
There is no problem to run python
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
ok.
what's not explained, and isn't clear, is exactly whether you're
supposed to - or even _capable_ of - cross-compiling the _entire_
python sourcecode base with mingw32, or whether you're supposed to
get _just_ the python.exe
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
So what's the status of this? Who is still interested in seeing what
patches considered?
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
___
rwmjones [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I'm very slowly working up a patch here (again 2.5.2).
Since I haven't actually got even python.exe compiled
yet I can't promise anything, but you never know ...
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
In particular, I think that X-compiling is a common request
added another one to the list.
justification: pywebkitgtk cross-compiling for win32, using mingw32.
i'm not paying for microsoft license fees, i'm not paying for a
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
the cross-compile fails on Parser/acceler.c
the reason is because the included file, pyconfig.h,
has #define gid_t int for use by the mingw32 compiler,
which is... bad!
removing gid_t from pyconfig.h bizarrely fixes the
compile
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
pyport.h line 773 - commenting out the test for LONG_BIT != 8 *
SIZEOF_LONG - we're cross-compiling amd64 host, target mingw32 - 32-bit.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
line 199 of thread_pthread.h and line 221:
Python/thread_pthread.h:200: error: aggregate value used where an
integer was expected
hmmm... maybe this is due to me using mingw32 based on gcc 4.4.4.
well, a quick #if 0 seems to
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
posixmodule.c - line 2328:
add this:
#if ( defined(__MINGW32__) || defined(__WATCOMC__) ||
defined(PYCC_VACPP) ) !defined(__QNX__)
res = mkdir(path);
#else
res = mkdir(path, mode);
#endif
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
posixmodule: line 3530:
#ifdef __MINGW32__
master_fd = open(DEV_PTY_FILE, O_RDWR); /* open master */
#else
master_fd = open(DEV_PTY_FILE, O_RDWR | O_NOCTTY); /* open master */
#endif
not sure i should be compiling
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
line 6193:
#if !defined(__MINGW32__) !defined(MS_WINDOWS) defined(HAVE_FCNTL_H)
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
Christopher Friedt added the comment:
I can confirm what John Stowers experienced with ac_cv_printf_zd
Did someone forget to run autoconf afterward?
When I did, retrying configure again returned an error saying that
config.sub was missing.
I made configure just write out a yes to the
John Stowers added the comment:
Hello,
I recently tried this in combination with jhbuild, cross compiling with
mingw (to built some python gtk extensions). I tried you patch against
the 2.5.1 version and recieved the following error:
checking for /dev/ptmx... yes
checking for /dev/ptc... no
John Stowers added the comment:
Sorry, I should have clarified further in my last comment. Looking over
the configure script I don't recognize the %zd test as one that could be
circumvented by supplying a config.cache file with the appropriate values.
How do I escape this limitation?
Scott Tsai added the comment:
John,
set ac_cv_printf_zd_format.
In general, read the configure.in source.
On Dec 10, 2007 1:17 PM, John Stowers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Stowers added the comment:
Sorry, I should have clarified further in my last comment. Looking over
the configure
Scott Tsai added the comment:
I messed up while generating cross-2.5.1.patch last time.
Added a hackish way to set disabled_module_list in setup.py from
corresponding environment variable.
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file8628/cross-2.5.1.patch
_
Scott Tsai added the comment:
Grumble, uploaded wrong version of patch.
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file8629/cross-2.5.1.patch
_
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1597850
_diff -urN --exclude
41 matches
Mail list logo
