Updates:
Status: Verified
Comment #22 on issue 1875 by colinpkc...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear
to miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Verified on Ubuntu 11.10 and lilypond 2.15.24: I see the function and file
names
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Labels: -Patch-push
Comment #21 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Pushed as a4fb364a0058f701e4e25e799b5ddef511effd72 if I haven't gotte
Updates:
Labels: -Patch-countdown Patch-push
Comment #20 on issue 1875 by colinpkc...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear
to miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Counted down to 20111204
Updates:
Labels: -Patch-new Patch-review
Comment #18 on issue 1875 by pkx1...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear to
miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Fair enough.
James
___
bug
Comment #17 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
I still cannot get any failure (I use LilyDev if that matters?).
Well, I wrote
The problem for which this is a fix only occurs with
Comment #16 on issue 1875 by pkx1...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear to
miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
David, thanks for your patience. I still cannot get any failure (I use
LilyDev if that matters?). After I do 'make&#
Comment #15 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Uh, IIRC that's the usual behavior since the dependencies are crap. Sorry,
I forgot.
You need to do "make" before d
Comment #14 on issue 1875 by pkx1...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear to
miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
hello,
I really am not sure here. I cannot get the same error as reported
initially and whatever I do (patch or no patch) i get
Comment #13 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
The important angle is that with both
CXXFLAGS=-fkeep-inline-functions ./autogen.sh
and with
./autogen.sh
make test in the flower
Comment #12 on issue 1875 by pkx1...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear to
miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
David,
Is there a specific way you want me to test this against whatever current
master is?
I'm slightly unsure if
Updates:
Labels: Patch-new
Comment #10 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875#c10
Better fix for issue 1875: use -lsupc++ if required.
This will cause working demangling even
Updates:
Status: Verified
Comment #9 on issue 1875 by philehol...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear
to miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
(No comment was entered for this change
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Labels: -Patch-new Fixed_2_5_18
Comment #8 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
In order to preserve my own sanity, I pushed a somewhat
Updates:
Labels: Patch-new
Comment #7 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875#c7
Keep yaffut from attempting to demangle.
Issue 1875
One can get the pretty output by piping the
Updates:
Owner: d...@gnu.org
Labels: -Patch-new Patch-review
Comment #5 on issue 1875 by pkx1...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear to
miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Passes make and no reg test diffs
james
Updates:
Labels: Patch-new
Comment #4 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875#c4
Keep yaffut from attempting to demangle.
Issue 1875
One can get the pretty output by piping the
Comment #3 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
As mentioned, just #include causes the make check failure when
using gcc 4.6.1 (Ubuntu Oneiros). The developer I contacted about it
Comment #2 on issue 1875 by d...@gnu.org: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Actually, just a file with
#include
will bomb out when compiled with -fkeep-inline-functions. I'll try
figuring out whether w
Comment #1 on issue 1875 by reinhold...@gmail.com: tests for flower appear
to miss instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
I'm able to reproduce this (with "./configure
CXXFLAGS=-fkeep-inline-functions
--disable-optimising").
If
"Dmytro O. Redchuk" writes:
> On Thu 08 Sep 2011, 14:13 David Kastrup wrote:
>> When configured with
>>
>> ./configure CXXFLAGS=-fkeep-inline-functions
>>
>> (which does not optimize unused functions away)
>>
>> make test fails in the flower subdirectory in the linking stage with
>> quite insc
On Thu 08 Sep 2011, 14:13 David Kastrup wrote:
> When configured with
>
> ./configure CXXFLAGS=-fkeep-inline-functions
>
> (which does not optimize unused functions away)
>
> make test fails in the flower subdirectory in the linking stage with
> quite inscrutable error messages.
>
> I don't hav
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Build
New issue 1875 by brownian.box: tests for flower appear to miss
instantiations of classes
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1875
Reported by David Kastrup,
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2011-09/msg00215.html
David Kastrup writes:
> When configured with
>
> ./configure CXXFLAGS=-fkeep-inline-functions
>
> (which does not optimize unused functions away)
>
> make test fails in the flower subdirectory in the linking stage with
> quite inscrutable error messages.
>
> I don't have the error message handy r
Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011, 14:13:12 schrieb David Kastrup:
> When configured with
>
> ./configure CXXFLAGS=-fkeep-inline-functions
>
> (which does not optimize unused functions away)
>
> make test fails in the flower subdirectory in the linking stage with
> quite inscrutable error message
When configured with
./configure CXXFLAGS=-fkeep-inline-functions
(which does not optimize unused functions away)
make test fails in the flower subdirectory in the linking stage with
quite inscrutable error messages.
I don't have the error message handy right now, but since this has been
buggi
25 matches
Mail list logo
