Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
> So something like the patch below?
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.
>
> diff --git a/libguile/posix.c b/libguile/posix.c
> index 74c743119..0b1fe2637 100644
> --- a/libguile/posix.c
> +++ b/libguile/posix.c
> @@ -105,8 +105,8 @@
> # else
> # define W_EXITCODE(ret, sig) ((ret) << 8 | (sig))
> # endif
> -#endif
> verify (WEXITSTATUS (W_EXITCODE (127, 0)) == 127);
> +#endif
>
>
> #include <signal.h>
I see you pushed that to master and I have done a full build from master
with the pkgsrc JIT workarounds. It mostly worked and I got this, which
may be because I purged not-needed packages (but the guile build didn't
complain at configure or check time, like it did for missing gperf which
I put back). Or maybe I just haven't gotten this far with 3.0.9-ish.
CC test_foreign_object_c-test-foreign-object-c.o
CCLD test-foreign-object-c
ld: ../../libguile/.libs/libguile-3.0.so: warning: warning: tmpnam() possibly
used unsafely, use mkstemp() or mkdtemp()
ld: /tmp//ccOnwVqC.ltrans0.ltrans.o: in function `finalizer':
/home/n0/gdt/SOFTWARE/GUILE/guile/BUILD/test-suite/standalone/../../../test-suite/standalone/test-foreign-object-c.c:42:
undefined reference to `rpl_free'
LTO seems enabled, but I see ranlib complaints in the build log. I know
LTO is not new in this micro. Maybe I'm trailing edge but it seems
slightly like living dangerously if not known to be ok -- but
--disable-lto is easy enough so no worries.
I kicked off a new build with --disable-lto, and that succeeded. Tests
are not entirely ok, but that's not a regression. I used the distfile
as a faux release to build guile pkgsrc from, and that built fine and
runs.
There are some issues for me to work through eventually, but for 3.0.9 I
have arrived at being ok with you releasing the current state of git
master (3 commits past rc1) as not having anything I can claim is a
regression and not anything I can't work around as before.
Greg
