On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
I am thinking that the many test failures under Debian Linux are due
to it using older tool versions such as Autoconf 2.61.
Facts, not thinking, please. We cannot read your computer's mind.
In this case, the thinking was correct. Many Debian test
Hello Bob,
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 06:34:46PM CEST:
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >>
> >>Perhaps things are not all that bad. While 35 of 110 tests fail
> >>under Debian Linux, only these two extra are failing under FreeBSD,
> >>OS-X, and Solaris:
> >>
> >
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Perhaps things are not all that bad. While 35 of 110 tests fail
under Debian Linux, only these two extra are failing under FreeBSD,
OS-X, and Solaris:
FAIL: tests/mdemo2-make.test
FAIL: tests/pdemo-make.test
It would probably be even more helpful if
Hi Ralf,
Den 2010-07-06 07:52 skrev Ralf Wildenhues:
Hi Peter,
any chance you could post your patches inline? Thanks.
Will do in the future, I hope they will not end up wrapped though...
* Peter Rosin wrote on Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 02:45:28PM CEST:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool
Howdy Bob,
On 6 Jul 2010, at 13:19, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 06:48:56AM CEST:
>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>>> Yesterday's libtool was doing quite good with the tests but I am
>>> seeing plenty of failures now for all Unixish targets
Hi Bob,
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 06:48:56AM CEST:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> >Yesterday's libtool was doing quite good with the tests but I am
> >seeing plenty of failures now for all Unixish targets. Even Linux
> >blows failures all over the place. Not
Hi Peter,
any chance you could post your patches inline? Thanks.
* Peter Rosin wrote on Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 02:45:28PM CEST:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2009-01/msg00152.html
This is ok with nits below addressed, thanks.
> Make preloading heed libname_spec.
>
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Peter Rosin wrote:
Inspired by the remarkable progress, I'm bringing up this
patch again.
It would be good if the progress was even more remarkable. Yesterday's
libtool was doing quite good with the tests but I am seeing plenty
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Peter Rosin wrote:
Inspired by the remarkable progress, I'm bringing up this
patch again.
It would be good if the progress was even more remarkable.
Yesterday's libtool was doing quite good with the tests but I am
seeing plenty of failures now for all Unixish targets. Ev
Hi!
Inspired by the remarkable progress, I'm bringing up this
patch again.
The discussion dead-ended last time without anything being
merged into any branch, but follow this thread to get up to
speed:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2009-01/msg00152.html
The patch has seen (ve
10 matches
Mail list logo