Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

Hi, On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 07:31 -0800, Bill Schottstaedt wrote: > In Linux FC4 dual x86-64, trying to build Guile 1.7.91 I get: This is http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2005-12/msg00048.html. I once did some painful CVS bisection, which for the compiler flags I was using brought it b

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

Hi, Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, they get to choose both texts that have a MD5 collision. > Looking at the PostScript source reveals that the texts have been > rigged, which should be enough if this goes to court. In our case, an > attacker would need to find a second meani

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

Hi, "Bill Schottstaedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > filesys.c:860: error: `NAME_MAX' undeclared (first use in this function) GNU (aka. GNU/Hurd) may very well have the same problem. (arbitrary limitations like this or `PATH_MAX' are not supported[0]) Can somebody check this? Thanks, Ludovic.

Re: [PATCH] Fixed `scm_i_take_stringbufn ()'

Hi, Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The `if' you put, with an fprintf stderr, should be fine. I think you're right. Here's the updated patch. Thanks, Ludovic. 2006-02-14 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *strings.c (scm_i_take_stringbufn): Register LEN + 1 octets

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > We are pleased to announce the release of Guile 1.7.91. This is a > release candidate for Guile 1.8. It can be found here: BTW, maybe you should also announce it on [EMAIL PROTECTED]' (which is relayed as the `gnu.announce' newsgroup). Thanks, Ludov

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> Well, they get to choose both texts that have a MD5 collision. >> Looking at the PostScript source reveals that the texts have been >> rigged, which should be enough if this goes to court. In our case, an >> attacker would need to find a second meani

Re: doc libdir and C code modules

Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Actually I had it a bit wrong, the usual autoconf $(libdir) value > > needs to get expanded by some shell/make. That'd be why I've been > > using that way I gues

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Han-Wen Nienhuys) writes: > what is your plan for maintaining the branches? The release-1-6 branch remains stable of course, and the release-1-8 branch will be stable after 1.8.0 has been released, and is now in feature freeze. "Stable" should mean "we try very hard to not reg

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

Andy Wingo says: > I once did some painful CVS bisection, which for the compiler flags I was > using brought it back to the introduction of the inline keyword in 2002 > or something. Perhaps you're on to something -- the "inline" business reminded me of the old pstate bug where a variable was bein

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

Michael Tuexen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > the check for socklen_t fails incorrectly because socklen_t is > defined in /sys/socket.h on Mac OS X, and on BSD systems in general. What happens after the check fails? Will Guile compile correctly anyway? (I tried 1.7.90 on a friends Powerbook. It

Re: [PATCH] Fixed `scm_i_take_stringbufn ()'

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > > The problem can be reproduced using the program found at the end of this > post. It could hardly be turned into a test case, however. I made some memory leak checks for myself by demanding that "(assoc-ref (gc-stats) 'bytes-malloced)" was steady acr

Re: [PATCH] Fixed `scm_i_take_stringbufn ()'

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > > Here's the updated patch. Thanks, I checked it in. ___ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

"Bill Schottstaedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > So, I rebuilt guile using -g3 > ... > : Stack overflow If that's gcc 4 then it might be the same thing afflicting i386 under -O3, that ceval/deval end up using a lot of stack. Try increasing the stack limit, ie. the guile one, wherever the defau

Re: Guile 1.7.91 has been released.

Hi, Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If that's gcc 4 then it might be the same thing afflicting i386 under > -O3, that ceval/deval end up using a lot of stack. Try increasing the > stack limit, ie. the guile one, wherever the default for that hides in > the sources ... Also, on PPC, I c

Re: [PATCH] Fixed `scm_i_take_stringbufn ()'

Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thanks, I checked it in. That is, in both branches? :-) Thanks, Ludovic. ___ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel