From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#14361: Building guile 2.0.9 under mingw + msys Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 23:19:24 +0200 Message-ID: <8737o77e3n.fsf@pobox.com> References: <87pqerdxq4.fsf@pobox.com> <83ehuy698u.fsf@gnu.org> <8362ga5h7h.fsf@gnu.org> <87r4ywpnv0.fsf@gnu.org> <83r4yw49u6.fsf@gnu.org> <87y5smnj86.fsf@pobox.com> <83ehudp29y.fsf@gnu.org> <87fw0s2tmx.fsf@pobox.com> <83a9r0p4jw.fsf@gnu.org> <87zjythmj1.fsf@pobox.com> <83fvxyemk2.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1466458407 11060 80.91.229.3 (20 Jun 2016 21:33:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 21:33:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 14361-done@debbugs.gnu.org, ludo@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 20 23:33:17 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6oh-00065y-En for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 23:33:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46668 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6og-0005CV-Mv for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:33:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58802) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6c7-00025J-Q7 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:20:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6bx-0007oq-W1 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:20:10 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:35781) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6bx-0007oc-Sy for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:20:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6bx-0003i4-Qz for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:20:01 -0400 Resent-From: Andy Wingo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 21:20:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 14361 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 14361@debbugs.gnu.org, wingo@pobox.com, eliz@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by 14361-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D14361.146645757614215 (code D ref 14361); Mon, 20 Jun 2016 21:20:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 14361-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jun 2016 21:19:36 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48116 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6bX-0003hD-Mu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:19:35 -0400 Original-Received: from pb-sasl1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.66]:60820 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bF6bW-0003h6-Ki for 14361-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:19:35 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31323255B6; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:19:33 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=VQILe8Zkr6k6qRUnPfFv4dba5Pw=; b=wAoJj4 0yQy3tG6Pkr1T+H9wgn/u2IdlFZC8eqJWXdMqVRLmFYmd9elqFR4PE/ukc1XohDI +v8erMIaz+PJPKTzrPtMv2+IVE/+mKxoqITjFR3JvoU32r6nOVtTEBXnkCmN7Pj9 n/yajEpyI/hDAITa9XzDGHunnt0e7/WSxGKm4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=iqtKtDNbaGAKmIqANkbb5pHpa2+E+k91 sdGteZHwqGjz6e6Vq8CMtRMCE+hgfRvqCb8jkJbEw7qXTLSrPSrTH1cT6TlgB3pT olxL+N94Vuq8Eo64KqsjxhG8DAKUEzb0mfV0s3XQZrzudzKzNfkySPVSd2/Ui2Bx aSF21kuBT10= Original-Received: from pb-sasl1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29EAC255B5; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:19:33 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from clucks (unknown [88.160.190.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C51A255B4; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:19:31 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83fvxyemk2.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 07 May 2013 20:18:05 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AE590048-372C-11E6-AA53-C1836462E9F6-02397024!pb-sasl1.pobox.com 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-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-guile" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:8047 Archived-At: Hi Eli :) Thank you for your ongoing work on MinGW and Guile, it's really appreciated. I just wanted to say that explicitly here, even though I'm closing this bug, as I understand that things have progressed a bit in these 3 years; anyway. Your work is so valuable to many users. Thanks! Andy On Tue 07 May 2013 19:18, Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Andy Wingo >> Cc: ludo@gnu.org, 10474-done@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 14:25:06 +0100 >> >> So with these last commits, hopefully native MinGW builds are supported. >> Would you mind testing again? Please send a new mail to >> bug-guile@gnu.org to track any new failures. > > Thanks, and sorry for a long delay. > > I tried today building Guile 2.0.9. The C compilation went very > smoothly, with only a couple of warnings (one is the known iconv > prototype "issue", the other a variable that is set and not used). > However, once it got to compiling Scheme files, it repeatedly failed > after writing each .go file. Here are a few typical failures: > > GEN guile-procedures.texi > Backtrace: > In unknown file: > ?: 3 [apply-smob/1 # #t ...] > ?: 2 [apply-smob/1 # quit #] > ?: 1 [apply-smob/1 # #t ...] > ?: 0 [apply-smob/1 #] > > ERROR: > > The program then sits at the ERROR: prompt, but does not accept any > input. > > Seems that this comes from smob.c: > > static SCM > scm_smob_trampoline (unsigned int nreq, unsigned int nopt, > unsigned int rest) > { > SCM trampoline; > > if (SCM_UNLIKELY (rest > 1 || nreq + nopt + rest > 3)) > scm_out_of_range ("make-smob", scm_from_uint (nreq + nopt + rest)); > > trampoline = SCM_SMOB_TRAMPOLINE (nreq, nopt, rest); > > if (SCM_LIKELY (SCM_UNPACK (trampoline))) > return trampoline; > > switch (nreq + nopt + rest) > { > /* The + 1 is for the smob itself. */ > case 0: > trampoline = scm_c_make_gsubr ("apply-smob/0", nreq + 1, nopt, rest, > apply_0); > break; > case 1: > trampoline = scm_c_make_gsubr ("apply-smob/1", nreq + 1, nopt, rest, > apply_1); > > But I have no idea what it means. > > When this happens, guile.exe still runs (actually, there are 2 Guile > processes, one a child of the other), so it is impossible to delete > guile-procedures.texi, because one of these processes holds it open. > I needed to kill guile.exe (the child) to be able to try again. > > I tried "make -k" to see how far I can advance. The next compilation > of ice-9/eval.scm then stops with the same error: > > make[2]: Entering directory `/d/usr/eli/utils/guile-2.0.9/module' > GUILEC ice-9/eval.go > wrote `ice-9/eval.go' > Backtrace: > In unknown file: > ?: 3 [apply-smob/1 # #t ...] > ?: 2 [apply-smob/1 # quit #] > ?: 1 [apply-smob/1 # #t ...] > ?: 0 [apply-smob/1 #] > > ERROR: > > Similarly after compiling ice-9/readline.scm: > > wrote `ice-9/readline.go' > Backtrace: > In unknown file: > ?: 4 [apply-smob/1 # quit #] > In ice-9/eval.scm: > 484: 3 [eval # #] > 481: 2 [lp (#) (#)] > In unknown file: > ?: 1 [apply-smob/1 #] > In ice-9/eval.scm: > 481: 0 [lp (#) ((#))] > > ice-9/eval.scm:481:19: > > Any ideas? Where should I look for the source of this problem? > > TIA