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#17399: Fwd: Re: bug#17399: compilation bugs when making guile-2.0.11 Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 15:45:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87y45yy7sl.fsf@pobox.com> References: <5386332E.4080707@psu.edu> <53868EA4.8050208@psu.edu> <8738ao7t60.fsf@yeeloong.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1466517434 26925 80.91.229.3 (21 Jun 2016 13:57:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:57:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 17399-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Ed Green To: Mark H Weaver Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 21 15:57:02 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 1bFMAk-0006jF-Lf for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 15:56:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52016 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bFMAj-0002GG-Td for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:56:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51365) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bFM0E-0006gu-H0 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:46:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bFM0A-0000Ji-85 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:46:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:36492) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bFM0A-0000Jd-2c for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:46:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bFM09-00040g-P4 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:46:01 -0400 Resent-From: Andy Wingo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:46:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 17399 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 17399@debbugs.gnu.org, wingo@pobox.com, eug2@psu.edu Original-Received: via spool by 17399-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D17399.146651675915397 (code D ref 17399); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:46:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17399-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jun 2016 13:45:59 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48829 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bFM07-00040H-0J for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:45:59 -0400 Original-Received: from pb-sasl1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.66]:54638 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bFM04-000408-BQ for 17399-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:45:56 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3912230AC; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:45:54 -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=AbL6e5pOWXn9ZEw+/vvjRh9H8fk=; b=fKfUa7 Jvf/PzDSrOv8clSU3Be2vUlbQ/qYY+fXayBlDOc807zl/owhTgCuf1K83ZA0uLy2 rNM+TeEPyvcvf3CcrJz8jNdTv46VQ42KQaz9ywfdXaKAIpX38OesRlpJaue6a5dT 8P1QAvh/8b45xSSXlZ2h22POd3F6Po4/knsWI= 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=m5OwMmdO5zVQf7eRtjm54fJG1uU/2Xdi 3Hifl1L8nfhv7FhCeERqbjFLbXNHQlTNGOtc1AiZ1BMzt8PnS4PpTall5sSy050A UWjyAXxFRTCtERUtN57GsPp/ivc9CvCAv6cL5bndymFlmiSp6UmPgQcnKuyZFooB JFH7QCbe5fM= Original-Received: from pb-sasl1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B230230AB; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:45:54 -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 B190C230AA; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:45:53 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <8738ao7t60.fsf@yeeloong.lan> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Wed, 15 Oct 2014 20:30:15 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 794EA116-37B6-11E6-9ACD-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:8093 Archived-At: On Thu 16 Oct 2014 02:30, Mark H Weaver writes: > retitle 17399 Problems building guile-2.0.11 with libunistring 0.9.0 > thanks > > Hi Ed, > > I finally looked into this test failure that you experienced when > compiling guile-2.0.11 from source code on Ubuntu 12.04. I see that > you've since updated to Ubuntu 14.04, which includes guile-2.0.11, so > your problems are happily solved, but I'm still curious to learn what > happened here. > > To summarize, your problems all stemmed from a very old GNU libunistring > that you had installed in /usr/local. It was quite a bit older than the > minimum required version (0.9.3) which was packaged in Ubuntu 12.04. > The configure script identified the installed version as 0.9.0. > > You should probably remove that old version of libunistring, as it will > likely cause problems with other software you build from source. > > The rest of this email is primarily aimed at other Guile developers. > > * * * > > First, we should improve our configure script to bail out if the > libunistring is too old. Done in master. That's enough to close this bug I think :) > After Ed had manually edited the old "unistr.h" to fix the compilation > problem, he encountered this test failure: > > ERROR: ports.test: unicode byte-order marks (BOMs): > Don't read from the port unless user asks to - arguments: > ((decoding-error "scm_from_stringn" "input locale conversion error" > 84 #vu8(254 255))) > > Here's the relevant section of test code in ports.test: > > (pass-if "Don't read from the port unless user asks to" > (let* ((p (make-soft-port > (vector > (lambda (c) #f) ; write char > (lambda (s) #f) ; write string > (lambda () #f) ; flush > (lambda () (throw 'fail)) ; read char > (lambda () #f)) > "rw"))) > (set-port-encoding! p "UTF-16") > (display "abc" p) > (set-port-encoding! p "UTF-32") > (display "def" p) > #t)) > > The error occurred within 'sf_write' in vports.c while writing the BOM > to the soft port (before writing "abc"). The problem is that soft ports > are fundamentally based on strings, and anything written to them is > first converted to a string (using the locale encoding) within > 'sf_write', in order to pass to the string to the user-provided "write" > procedure. Attempting to convert the UTF-16-encoded-BOM (0xFE 0xFF) to > the locale encoding failed, unsurprisingly. > > I believe the locale should have been "C", because of the call > (setlocale LC_ALL "C") in test-suite/guile-test. > > I'm actually surprised that this has ever worked, and it warrants > further investigation. It seems the BOM isn't being written. I don't know why. Let's open another bug if we find that there's a bug. Cheers, Andy