From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: guile 1.8.3 fails to build on sparc Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:53:13 +0100 Message-ID: <87lk5wa0xi.fsf@dellish.bordeaux.inria.fr> References: <874pcwqmct.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1202421178 31622 80.91.229.12 (7 Feb 2008 21:52:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 21:52:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rlb@defaultvalue.org To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 07 22:53:10 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JNEg4-0007n7-LE for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:53:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JNEfc-0001Qi-3C for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:52:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JNEfT-0001Li-G4 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:52:27 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JNEfR-0001Jy-WD for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:52:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JNEfR-0001Js-SZ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:52:25 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JNEfR-0006d0-E2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:52:25 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JNEfJ-00033q-54 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:52:17 +0000 Original-Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:52:17 +0000 Original-Received: from ludo by reverse-83.fdn.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:52:17 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 28 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: reverse-83.fdn.fr X-Revolutionary-Date: 19 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pluvi=F4se?= an 216 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEB1F5364 X-PGP-Key: http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: i486-pc-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:TBx8KDaYyYzyOX9QykriJlY8nNY= X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:6989 Archived-At: Hi, Neil Jerram writes: > Kamaraju S Kusumanchi writes: > >> I don't have access to sparc machine to probe into this problem. Can someone >> look at >> http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=guile-1.8;ver=1.8.3%2B1-1;arch=sparc;stamp=1195798674 >> and see why guile-1.8-libs fails to build on a sparc machine? > > Sorry this response is so delayed. Seems to be a GC issue: > > FAIL: gc.test: gc: Unused modules are removed This indeed looks like a reference to a single module is kept somewhere, e.g., in an area of the stack that was not overwritten by subsequent calls, leading to the wrong object count. Adding a function call right before the first `(gc)' sometimes fixes the problem, sometimes not. The attached snippet reliably fixes the problem on my GNU/Linux sparc64 box, though. Rob: Would it be possible for you to try out this patch on one of the Debian SPARC machines? Thanks in advance, Ludovic.