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#10681: GNU Guile 2.0.5 released Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 20:23:32 +0200 Message-ID: <87r4sowxy3.fsf@pobox.com> References: <87r4yg3l3e.fsf@gnu.org> <6B207FB0-C631-4DF8-A09D-046E2EB27361@telia.com> <87hazbg341.fsf@netris.org> <0C009B24-5C81-47B1-8C82-97B6DFEC3B68@telia.com> <878vknfywv.fsf@netris.org> <2810F73C-12D6-4203-9BDA-E7C0CFDF5959@telia.com> <87lione31p.fsf@netris.org> <2C04330C-5F9D-449A-B8B0-748258D5A22D@telia.com> <874nvasrg7.fsf@pobox.com> <87wr86r4e4.fsf@pobox.com> <5CDCE837-9E9D-45EA-AEBF-FE5FBD5D4C00@telia.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1341599056 4595 80.91.229.3 (6 Jul 2012 18:24:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 18:24:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Mark H Weaver , Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , 10681-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Hans Aberg Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 06 20:24:13 2012 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 1SnDCO-0000fN-HZ for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 20:24:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50218 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SnDCN-0002R3-4t for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:24:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38942) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SnDCJ-0002Pm-AI for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:24:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SnDCG-0007Ks-0E for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:24:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43616) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SnDCF-0007KX-Qa for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:24:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SnDH4-0004N4-Le for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:29:02 -0400 Resent-From: Andy Wingo Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 18:29:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 10681 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 10681@debbugs.gnu.org, wingo@pobox.com Original-Received: via spool by 10681-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D10681.134159931816764 (code D ref 10681); Fri, 06 Jul 2012 18:29:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10681-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jul 2012 18:28:38 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53160 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SnDGf-0004ML-UM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:28:38 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([74.115.168.62]:38881 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SnDGd-0004MD-Lx for 10681-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:28:36 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F94FCADD; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:23:36 -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=PLtpxwH03t96A6xfcEWvZGFq1AA=; b=NYy34R 7L5JWAOmeuVEzvcBXp957wrkVFK7vdGVCfgu3TG4n+Z7dKkVVNrfXtGigKUeWLns ywQkM63x1LJaSPSVHt2M58PGR78aOzxkXfJWgnA5bVD+nPL8mDvFHNW89IREv/yp PprLgqyIWsHHp60g0j4R9SlOY2x5HCkXlqIe4= 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=fzy1IanV7iBLh1xGO1SE3Nr2mlXdmN3E 6FAaDfI02lt/usUgN7Au89NT+JDbIRzS3aaZUN9knOZFlNNhT0aZCEH7ek8uzA0p Sb7XHCwzI0ibqSziJwbnYNdS9vV+bYBc7qrjdbGFp0KU1QUAd6K3b3FKCS2gOOKg ngSmpTPwtK4= Original-Received: from b-pb-sasl-sd. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37349CADC; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:23:36 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from badger (unknown [89.131.176.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9327CCADB; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:23:35 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <5CDCE837-9E9D-45EA-AEBF-FE5FBD5D4C00@telia.com> (Hans Aberg's message of "Wed, 1 Feb 2012 16:08:10 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B3284A42-C797-11E1-9FB4-FA6787E41631-02397024!b-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:6417 Archived-At: On Wed 01 Feb 2012 16:08, Hans Aberg writes: > On 1 Feb 2012, at 15:53, Andy Wingo wrote: > >>> There is no issue with libffi from latest GIT compiled with >>> llvm-gcc-4.2, and guile-2.0.5 compiled with SVN gcc-4.7. >> >> But there is an issue with libffi from git compiled with llvm-gcc-4.2, >> and guile-2.0.5 compiled with llvm-gcc-4.2? > > Right, only that I think the issue is with guile-2.0.5 compiled with llvm-gcc-4.2. > >> Can you try compiling libffi from GIT with gcc-4.7, and guile-2.0.5 with >> llvm-gcc-4.2? >> >> Just to check :) > > Unfortunately, llvm-gcc-4.2 is very slow; compiling guile-2.0.5 takes a very long time. So I think I will have to give up on this one. Closing this one as done then. Whenever you give a newer Guile a try (like tomorrow's 2.0.6), we can look again. Thanks! Andy -- http://wingolog.org/