On 28 May 2007 at 17:02, Luigi Ballabio wrote: | On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 15:14 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > On 25 May 2007 at 22:04, Luigi Ballabio wrote: | > | Not yet. The Boost 1.34 release was exceptionally bad timing for us, | > | since we were finalizing release 0.8.0 when it was made. Instead of | > | installing 1.34 and restarting the tests (which I did suspect would | > | fail---see <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/159278>) | > | I chose not to further delay 0.8.0. In fact, the release notes suggest | > | to use 1.33.1 on Linux systems. If this makes things difficult for you, | > | I'll try and make a 0.8.1 release to add Boost 1.34 compatibility; but | > | at this point 0.8.0 is frozen. | > | > I think we simply need to work the configure script. From my casual glance | > at it, boost doesn't seem to have change file locations so I am confused as | > to what could have caused this to break. | | As reported in the cited thread, the API of the Boost unit-test | framework changed somewhat. In particular, the shared library we link | against used to define a main() function, but no longer does so---which
Ahh. That explains it. I was so mystified by the short autoconf oneliner failing that I didn't look much further. Well I looked but failed to find its definiton so I stalled. | is the probable source of the error (what does config.log say? It should | include a log of the failed test with the exact compilation or linker | error.) In short, we'll probably have to change the test sources to | make it work with the new framework. As soon as I get 0.8.0 out, I'll | make the changes and release 0.8.1 to add 1.34 support and fix your | build. But please let me release 0.8.0 first. It's finalized now, and I | rather not reopen it and restart a release cycle because Boost made a | release. That's fine. I put QL 0.8.0 into Debian unstable. | > [ Oh, and while I have you here: we have a really weird build bug with | > QL-Swig on a few more obscure arches. I didn't bug you with that as it | > build on all other version -- but see how 0.4.0 failed on a view. From | > the errors I see on the failed attempts, it looks to me as if gcc et | > al are to blame. We'll see. Source URLs are | > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=419742 and | > http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=quantlib-swig ] | | Weird. But as I don't know anything about mips, I'd check the suggestion | of the developer who reported the bug. Do you have the log of the main | QuantLib compilation? Is it possible to check that it did include -fPIC | at each g++ invocation? I don't have more logs that those db'ed at these URL, but I could if need be get shell access on those machines. They used to build QL/QL-Swig just fine so it may just be a compiler regression. I also put QL-Swig 0.8.0 into Debian unstable now, so let's see how that fares. Dirk -- Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something. -- Thomas A. Edison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
