Hi!
As reported by Roumen Petrov [1], the cwrapper test is somewhat
disfunctional.
Ok to push the attached?
Cheers,
Peter
[1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2009-01/msg00201.html
2009-01-29 Peter Rosin
Make modified libtool script in cwrapper test executable
* Peter Rosin wrote on Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 09:02:57AM CET:
> 2009-01-29 Peter Rosin
>
> Make modified libtool script in cwrapper test executable
> * tests/cwrapper.at: Make modified libtool script executable.
> Report by Roumen Petrov.
This is obvious, thanks.
Den 2009-01-28 23:44 skrev Peter Rosin:
Den 2009-01-28 16:13 skrev Charles Wilson:
Peter Rosin wrote:
Maybe, here are the errors:
So, I guess these declarations should do it (untested):
int _setmode (int, int);
int _spawnv (int, const char *, const char * const *);
#ifndef _P_WAIT /* just in
Peter Rosin wrote:
> I have:
> $ gcc -v
> Reading specs from C:/MinGW/bin/../lib/gcc/mingw32/3.4.2/specs
> Configured with: ../gcc/configure --with-gcc --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as
> --host=mingw32 --target=mingw32 --prefix=/mingw --enable-threads
> --disable-nls --enable-languages=c,c++,f77,ada,obj
Den 2009-01-29 11:49 skrev Charles Wilson:
What version of mingw-runtime are you using? (I'm not sure which version
I have; its from a bundle I put together about a year ago; I can get to
the docu for that bundler later today. It's probably mingw-runtime-3.14).
Something prior to [1] obviously.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Peter Rosin wrote:
Den 2009-01-29 11:49 skrev Charles Wilson:
What version of mingw-runtime are you using? (I'm not sure which version
I have; its from a bundle I put together about a year ago; I can get to
the docu for that bundler later today. It's probably mingw-runtime-
Hi Akim,
* Akim Demaille wrote on Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 09:24:32AM CET:
> Le 6 janv. 09 à 07:48, Ralf Wildenhues a écrit :
>>
>> Are those the only distcc/ccache-induced failures?
>
> Yes, I had no other failures.
Thanks, and sorry for the delay. In the meantime, the localization code
has seen so
Den 2009-01-29 18:26 skrev Bob Friesenhahn:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Peter Rosin wrote:
Den 2009-01-29 11:49 skrev Charles Wilson:
What version of mingw-runtime are you using? (I'm not sure which version
I have; its from a bundle I put together about a year ago; I can get to
the docu for that bund
* Peter Rosin wrote on Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 06:53:48PM CET:
>
> But maybe, just maybe, you don't have a desperate need to do
> "-std=c89 -Werror" :-)
Guys, if all you're working around is -Werror, then stop right now.
Just eliminate -Werror from $LTCC $LTCFLAGS and be done with it.
The cwrapper ma
Den 2009-01-29 18:56, skrev Ralf Wildenhues:
* Peter Rosin wrote on Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 06:53:48PM CET:
But maybe, just maybe, you don't have a desperate need to do
"-std=c89 -Werror" :-)
Guys, if all you're working around is -Werror, then stop right now.
Just eliminate -Werror from $LTCC $LT
Hi Akim,
* Akim Demaille wrote on Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:43:56PM CET:
>
> Some of my patches are waiting for approvals or comments.
> I do understand that it requires time to process them, I
> just want to make sure they aren't forgotten :)
Thanks for the reminder. I think I had them all on my
* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 09:47:54PM CET:
> > The long line in ltmain.m4sh is actually necessary in order for
> > libtool --version
> >
> > to work correctly. Will address in a followup patch.
>
> OK to push?
I've pushed this now.
Cheers,
Ralf
> func_version copes
* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 03:52:49PM CET:
> Please note that there is an alternative short-hand, in that you
> can use (among others) the following equivalently:
> libtool --mode=execute PROG [ARGS]...
> libtoolexecute PROG [ARGS]...
> libtoolexe PROG
Le 29 janv. 09 à 18:47, Ralf Wildenhues a écrit :
Hi Akim,
* Akim Demaille wrote on Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 09:24:32AM CET:
Le 6 janv. 09 à 07:48, Ralf Wildenhues a écrit :
Are those the only distcc/ccache-induced failures?
Yes, I had no other failures.
Thanks, and sorry for the delay. In
Le 29 janv. 09 à 19:22, Ralf Wildenhues a écrit :
- nuke warnings in the wrappers
The patch at the end of
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2008-12/msg00069.html
For this one I'd prefer if Charles and/or Peter took care of it, they
have a bunch of changes in this area and some dis
Peter Rosin wrote:
Den 2009-01-29 18:56, skrev Ralf Wildenhues:
* Peter Rosin wrote on Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 06:53:48PM CET:
But maybe, just maybe, you don't have a desperate need to do
"-std=c89 -Werror" :-)
Guys, if all you're working around is -Werror, then stop right now.
Just eliminate -W
Peter Rosin wrote:
Den 2009-01-29 00:45 skrev Roumen Petrov:
I'm sure that I test libtool in mingw-cross env. after Charles add
cwrapper test. Now I repeat the test N# 37(cwrapper) in verbose mode and
the results is:
...
/at-groups/37/test-source: line 73: ./libtool: Permission denied
..
* Akim Demaille wrote on Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 08:44:51PM CET:
> Le 29 janv. 09 à 19:22, Ralf Wildenhues a écrit :
>
>>> - Bootstrap failures
>>>
>>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-libtool/2008-11/msg00098.html
>>>
>>> I suggest adding the following macros to lt~obsolete.m4 to stop
>>> the
Peter Rosin wrote:
> Den 2009-01-29 11:49 skrev Charles Wilson:
>> What version of mingw-runtime are you using? (I'm not sure which version
>> I have; its from a bundle I put together about a year ago; I can get to
>> the docu for that bundler later today. It's probably mingw-runtime-3.14).
>
> So
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> My own MinGW install dates from the 2002/2003 time frame. :-)
>
> At the time MinGW/MSYS was a simple install. Nowadays it seems to be
> all jumbled up so I have not tried to cross the hurdle of an update.
Yes, the MinGW download site is a disaster, thanks to SF "improve
Roumen Petrov wrote:
> I think that we has to be careful about structure _stat and version of
> msvcrt (>=8.0) - it depend from definition of time_t 32/64 bit and the
> size is deferent depending from an another macro. May be wrapper has to
> include MSVC headers.
This is all moot. We (libtool's c
Akim Demaille wrote:
> Le 29 janv. 09 à 19:22, Ralf Wildenhues a écrit :
>> For this one I'd prefer if Charles and/or Peter took care of it, they
>> have a bunch of changes in this area and some discussion going on.
>> Actually, I'd prefer to just be able to say "go!" once y'all have agreed
>> on a
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Akim Demaille wrote on Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:43:56PM CET:
>> - nuke warnings in the wrappers
>>
>> The patch at the end of
>>
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2008-12/msg00069.html
>
> For this one I'd prefer if Charles and/or Peter took care of it, the
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Peter Rosin wrote on Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 06:53:48PM CET:
>> But maybe, just maybe, you don't have a desperate need to do
>> "-std=c89 -Werror" :-)
>
> Guys, if all you're working around is -Werror, then stop right now.
> Just eliminate -Werror from $LTCC $LTCFLAGS and b
Hi Charles,
* Charles Wilson wrote on Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 05:34:08AM CET:
> See earlier reply in this thread for why we don't need to worry about
> any other magic MSVC macros. So, I think the only remaining
> cleanup-warnings patch for the cwrapper is this:
>
> diff --git a/libltdl/config/ltmai
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Charles Wilson wrote on Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 05:34:08AM CET:
>> OK to push?
>
> Fine with me. Thanks for working through this!
Pushed (credited to Akim).
--
Chuck
26 matches
Mail list logo
