From: "Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com>
To: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Stack calibration
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:10:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49dd78620809301510q173d1777rd26240ce40f204f0@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87abdsf337.fsf@gnu.org>
2008/9/28 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:
>
> "Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:
>
>> I've done this part a bit differently - see the libguile/Makefile.am
>> changes - because I couldn't see exactly how the recursive make
>> approach would work. If you think recursive make would be
>> significantly better, can you describe or propose the detailed changes
>> that would be needed?
>
> Your proposition looks very good actually. I suppose the generated
> makefile doesn't require recompilation of all `.lo' files to go from
> `libuguile' to `libguile', right?
If you mean does it actually compile them all again?: yes, I'm afraid
it does. I think this is because the generated makefile thinks that
libuguile_la-eval.lo and libguile_la-eval.lo are separate objects.
If you mean does it need to?: no, it doesn't, because none of the
files apart from stackchk.c/stackchk-calibrated.c have actually
changed at all.
I currently don't know of a good solution for this.
It might work to define:
(i) a convenience library consisting of everything in libguile except
for stackchk.c/stackchk-calibrated.c
(ii) libuguile.la, consisting of the convenience library + stackchk.c
(iii) libguile.la, consisting of the convenience library +
stackchk-calibrated.c.
But I would be surprised if that didn't cause a regression on some
less mainstream platforms.
Do you have any suggestions?
> I'm not sure about cross-compilation (Dale Smith had also raised this
> issue on IRC some time ago). IIUC, the user is expected to provide a
> `UGUILE_FOR_BUILD' at configure-time, which is then used to run
> `calibrate.scm'; however, `UGUILE_FOR_BUILD' runs on the host, not the
> target system, so the generated file will be erroneous, right?
Probably, yes.
> Thus, when cross-compiling, shouldn't we avoid stack calibration
> altogether and simply emit a warning a configure-time, for instance?
Well, ideally we should have a solution that works automatically in
all circumstances...
> At any rate, it's not a problem when cross-compiling with tools like
> Scratchbox, which actually "hide" the fact that we're cross-compiling
> and can run executables for the target system through an emulator.
Agreed.
Regards,
Neil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-30 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <47B2A8DF.9070004@tammer.net>
[not found] ` <87tzkd8bvz.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <87ejbh8ben.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <47B2D88F.1040505@tammer.net>
[not found] ` <87ir0tvx6e.fsf@inria.fr>
2008-02-13 20:40 ` stack overflow Neil Jerram
2008-02-14 8:48 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-02-14 10:26 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2008-02-14 11:25 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-02-14 11:39 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2008-02-25 21:52 ` Neil Jerram
2008-07-16 12:34 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-12 20:47 ` Stack calibration Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-27 18:20 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-28 20:05 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-30 22:10 ` Neil Jerram [this message]
2008-10-02 8:25 ` Andy Wingo
2008-10-02 8:38 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-02 22:30 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-06 22:32 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-10-06 23:11 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-09 22:53 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-10 13:22 ` Greg Troxel
2008-10-10 18:04 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-10 18:28 ` Greg Troxel
2008-10-10 18:41 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-11 17:22 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-10-12 15:59 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-12 21:16 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-13 21:37 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-14 7:25 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-10-17 20:49 ` Neil Jerram
2008-10-14 7:19 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-28 20:07 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-30 22:11 ` Neil Jerram
2008-02-17 1:38 ` stack overflow Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-02-17 9:20 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2009-03-27 21:19 stack calibration Andy Wingo
2009-03-27 22:04 ` Mike Gran
2009-03-27 22:29 ` Julian Graham
2009-03-30 20:43 ` Neil Jerram
2009-03-31 3:39 ` Andy Wingo
2009-03-31 22:47 ` Neil Jerram
2009-04-03 17:44 ` Andy Wingo
2009-03-31 17:45 ` Greg Troxel
2009-04-17 9:35 ` Andy Wingo
2009-03-31 16:20 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49dd78620809301510q173d1777rd26240ce40f204f0@mail.gmail.com \
--to=neiljerram@googlemail.com \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).