From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Peter O'Gorman" Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: guile-1.8.5 test failures Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:07:04 -0500 Message-ID: <20080605030704.GB27383@tw.il.thewrittenword.com> References: <20080529214535.GA513@tw.il.thewrittenword.com> <8763sr7h18.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1212635490 15191 80.91.229.12 (5 Jun 2008 03:11:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 03:11:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org To: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 05 05:12:12 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K45tX-0000SM-G4 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 05:12:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53583 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K45sk-0004kF-Uv for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:11:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K45sF-0004Rw-Ez for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:10:47 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K45sF-0004Rc-2V for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:10:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35359 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K45sE-0004RY-Kh for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:10:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mail1.thewrittenword.com ([67.95.107.114]:58717) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K45s9-0002yl-N3; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:10:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mail1.il.thewrittenword.com (emma-internal-gw.il.thewrittenword.com [192.168.13.25]) by mail1.thewrittenword.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8025E5C32; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 03:11:59 +0000 (UTC) X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.4.4 mail1.thewrittenword.com 8025E5C32 Original-Received: from tw.pogma.org (danger-gw.il.thewrittenword.com [192.168.1.254]) by mail1.il.thewrittenword.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6764518E; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 03:10:36 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from tw.pogma.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tw.pogma.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m55375o8017255; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:07:05 -0500 Original-Received: (from pogma@localhost) by tw.pogma.org (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m55374AW017254; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:07:04 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: tw.pogma.org: pogma set sender to bug-guile@mlists.thewrittenword.com using -f Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8763sr7h18.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.93, clamav-milter version 0.93 on maetel.il.thewrittenword.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 6.x (1) X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:3892 Archived-At: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 09:50:27PM +0200, Ludovic Court=E8s wrote: > > 1. Fix a build failure on hppa-hpux11.23 due to core dump during conf= igure > > with -luca >=20 > What's wrong with using it on non-IA64 machines? Isn't it supposed > serve the same purpose regardless of the architecture? Well it is only used on ia64. On pa_risc there is no need for it. The section of code that uses it is in #ifdef __ia64__ #ifdef __hpux in gc.c, it is not needed on pa_risc, and caused a problem for us. >=20 > > 2. Don't detect the non-posix gmtime_r and readdir_r on hpux10.20 >=20 > Does defining `_POSIX_SOURCE' fix it? hpux-10.20 is very old and does not have posix conforming versions of these functions, the versions that it does have are from an earlier posix draft. >=20 > > 3. Fix build error on Tru64 Unix with the DEC compiler, which does no= t like > > the non-constant expression in case: statements, and on irix which= does > > not like the non-constant expression in the initializers in read.c= and > > print.c. (yes, I know - yuck). >=20 > But these are constants! I'll look into this again. >=20 > > 4. #define LONG_LONG_MIN and LONG_LONG_MAX id the are not available > > (unfortunately I can not remember which system this was on). >=20 > Eh, can you remember now? :-) No, but perhaps we should just use SCM_I_LLONG_MIN and SCM_I_LLONG_MAX (which I have only just noticed) here. >=20 > > 5. Some older systems have inttypes.h that does not define PRIiMAX. >=20 > OK, I checked it in. > Thanks. =20 > > 6. xlc on AIX 4.3 does not like 'static const char s_scm_hash_fold[];= ', we > > moved the code around to make it unnecessary. >=20 > Hmm, what does it mean that it doesn't like it? It's valid C, right? >=20 > (It's always annoying to move code around because then it makes it > harder to track the origin of a change, e.g., via `git-blame'.) > Well, after preprocessing the compiler sees something like: static const char s_scm_hash_fold[]; .... .... static const char s_scm_hash_fold[]=3D"Some string"; And, rightly, I think, complains. By moving the code around it sees: static const char s_scm_hash_fold[]=3D"Some string"; .... .... =20 And it likes that better :-) > OK, we'll see that later if you don't mind. :-) Ok. Thanks. Peter --=20 Peter O'Gorman pogma@thewrittenword.com