From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Trunk bootstrap failure [Cygwin] Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:08:51 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4C326C4F.2010604@alice.it> <4C32F295.7050608@alice.it> <4C344500.9010906@alice.it> <4C3518CD.3030609@alice.it> <4C35A3C6.7080306@alice.it> <4C3728EE.9060904@alice.it> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278695356 24952 80.91.229.12 (9 Jul 2010 17:09:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 17:09:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs To: Angelo Graziosi Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 09 19:09:14 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OXH4c-00015W-81 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 19:09:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60966 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OXH4b-0000OE-Nt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:09:13 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47543 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OXH4I-0000Hx-Co for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:08:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OXH4H-0005ar-3z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:08:54 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:49474) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OXH4G-0005an-U2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:08:53 -0400 Original-Received: from dann by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OXH4F-0008OO-Ef; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:08:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C3728EE.9060904@alice.it> (Angelo Graziosi's message of "Fri\, 09 Jul 2010 15\:49\:34 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126960 Archived-At: Angelo Graziosi writes: > Il 09/07/2010 1.07, Dan Nicolaescu ha scritto: >> Angelo Graziosi writes: >> >>> Il 08/07/2010 7.54, Dan Nicolaescu ha scritto: >>>> Angelo Graziosi writes: >>>> >>>>> Since 'start_of_text' is not used by Cygwin build, shouldn't 'ecrt0.c' >>>>> be completely unnecessary? >>>> >>>> That's exactly the reason for this discussion: getting rid of ecrt0.c. >>> >>> Hmm... bootstrapping rev. 100753 *without* patches (i.e. using >>> ecrt0.c), shows that: >>> >>> $ grep -R start_of_text emacs/inst/usr/local/emacs >>> >>> is *empty* (emacs/inst/usr/local/emacs is the Emacs installation >>> directory). This would mean that the function 'start_of_text' is not >>> compiled any more in the Cygwin build. Right? >> >> Sure, before yesterday it was just sitting there unused. >> > > What about 'ecrt0.c'? It seems that it happens the same for it. > > For completeness, the bootstrap (rev. 100755) I did applying *only* > this patch: > > ===================================================== > --- emacs.orig/configure 2010-07-02 11:27:38.000000000 +0200 > +++ emacs/configure 2010-07-06 10:45:21.656250000 +0200 > @@ -5864,7 +5864,7 @@ > case $opsys in > cygwin ) > LIB_MATH= > - START_FILES='ecrt0.o' > + START_FILES='pre-crt0.o' > ;; > darwin ) > ## Adding -lm confuses the dynamic linker, so omit it. > ===================================================== > > is still working. As expected. Nothing in this area has changed since you tried this a couple of days ago. I'd like to make this change. And in order to plan for the unexpected: if in the next few months you get weird memory errors, are you willing to test again with this patch reverted?