From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#28308: Build failure on FreeBSD/aarch64 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 14:52:32 -0400 Message-ID: References: <2e5f41f7-e005-c28f-c04a-79953a804f71@harmless.hu> <8760d17pyj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <9ae1840f-9056-8771-43fa-b27bbd2b1bd3@harmless.hu> <87k218g33g.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <2fbe77fe-1258-cef2-32e2-f741da514151@harmless.hu> <83y3powdsv.fsf@gnu.org> <87k215lqdf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <837ex5thtt.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw09s148.fsf@gnu.org> <83bmmhrw84.fsf@gnu.org> <29f4260c-2fff-9051-5882-0acec819739f@harmless.hu> <8760bag128.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83wp3qcn5k.fsf@gnu.org> <6927f701-035c-3267-3be6-0436b00d2a3d@harmless.hu> <6ef7dc53-d53f-5675-8f0b-376752cf075c@harmless.hu> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1509562392 14342 195.159.176.226 (1 Nov 2017 18:53:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 18:53:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 28308@debbugs.gnu.org To: Gergely Czuczy Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 01 19:53:08 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y8P-00039T-8W for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 19:53:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57307 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y8W-00026e-Om for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 14:53:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51758) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y8Q-00026W-W8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 14:53:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y8N-000088-2q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 14:53:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:37702) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y8M-00007p-Vv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 14:53:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y8M-0004sy-Gl for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 14:53:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2017 18:53:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28308 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 28308-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28308.150956236018750 (code B ref 28308); Wed, 01 Nov 2017 18:53:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28308) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Nov 2017 18:52:40 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46383 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y80-0004sM-6w for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 14:52:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wr0-f174.google.com ([209.85.128.174]:52621) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e9y7y-0004s9-Uw for 28308@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 14:52:39 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wr0-f174.google.com with SMTP id k62so2785116wrc.9 for <28308@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 11:52:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=fcpSisnttZs2Mszy8EbauhH/OJ6BpgQvwgLBRl+F0Iw=; b=p+POj+cJy04u/RmiB5Mi7Iy24GVotfIyWHEXSJwyC7YK5Y3pTmlPy7elmCdsASLj1e SS16pPwsTmnb4cy0mHNnHDstfQZKOnYaOJ8RN3qd1gAZcFxsTuiNwcGSJBe7h2XllTCv adbYyXFsjbwuK4yW7H0/EZhl0sV3hjgcHL+IbzEnxZge0jTfBJkz0MgKw6p5tsiC0q1r 9hS+uDgwIX/Rlo9gKp8070aVKAQ4cIAxJkiKywpbZ3AhH6VZkDHf+l7YQPcjwPgUpD1X MHO9CxcNhZlcesOqxgSbdeI7r5Muj5Pf3SasmrZwcnqVHAj+PwiBYUin5XL9ZJhx89jv 8IyA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fcpSisnttZs2Mszy8EbauhH/OJ6BpgQvwgLBRl+F0Iw=; b=PlibxdHRY+GUl99zT9XNomQbCDbK1WU31/s7Y90qpqev9fvX0WVptHYkAUVpQPs6H/ DCRkbzpnoAc0jHgcaC7TzA/RyD6uhSrDR8JkUjPZKQZXurobJeTM+ZlpuzrsuiwJmJf4 BdiuOgALvnXpmRFsb6sWP5YLABPmPMRg9DdE9+BZFglSTYaxp+TWr8mZNRy6ydtFZJYB DfiCZzrWr/8HKUsfn6j7hCwCODq/cMz21sd19oqZAILbZVIdn0vDb3XyIX6XAHEAB9xE OMt7FarmyzG1ES6sAIqgGYMsMO2zlDewkNaoIyqs6IMfgYbEIWMihFcIsAlGLlA3PTcT 6ZXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaX2MYwF3A/h3j3TDReKfisXF2GEd9HEiz6ApXQGHyC1ZwGwNi09 eY5/fYH/BvstFF1Ay5Qb6OuE2Yeubt12zhD9KU8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+SGH7Va+eoJg8NdEKNmCtaWYPfQnkEqzdmAHflPIpcjFghefox+kvYTNbHzW/6YKJJq9AICXzEuukH5GAHQOcQ= X-Received: by 10.223.131.65 with SMTP id 59mr604652wrd.66.1509562353157; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 11:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.223.146.227 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 11:52:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6ef7dc53-d53f-5675-8f0b-376752cf075c@harmless.hu> X-Google-Sender-Auth: eQ5-XDIlO71LRBAIcxuDRZfI5I4 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:139326 Archived-At: On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Gergely Czuczy wrote: >> By the way, do you know about the status of Emacs on FreeBSD x86? It >> seems to me that the problem and solution are not specific to aarch64. > > On x86 (as in 32 bit terms), I don't really know. All my systems are amd64 > ones, and on that one, it runs fine. However, I haven't checked the > development branch, just the release. That works fine. Oh, yeah, I didn't mean 32 bit specifically. Actually, reading the OP of #24892 again, it sounds like sbrk is only removed from arm, so I guess x86/amd64 would still have it, and could therefore use the gmalloc-only scheme successfully. > But if that's any help, I can give it a shot tomorrow on amd64 as well, and > see how it goes. If you can check my patch on amd64 as well it would be good. Although perhaps I should change the patch to only switch to hybrid malloc if sbrk is missing, to avoid changing working platforms, at least for emacs-26. > Regarding the patch, I should apply it to the latest checkout, right? Yes, the latest emacs-26. I've only tested on top of 35c893ddaf as I haven't worked out how to update the VM, but I don't think anything has changed in that area recently so there should be no problem applying it to more recent checkouts.