Op vrijdag 05-06-2009 om 23:05 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Anthony W.
Youngman:
Hi Anthony,
> >> >I think that's a pretty usual setup (most people I know have a 32bit
> >> >version
> >> >of Linux installed on their laptop even though their CPU is actually
> >> >64bit).
> >
> >Sometimes it mak
In message <1244195981.25811.178.ca...@heerbeest>, Jan Nieuwenhuizen
writes
Op donderdag 04-06-2009 om 10:46 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Anthony
W. Youngman:
>I think that's a pretty usual setup (most people I know have a 32bit version
>of Linux installed on their laptop even though their CP
Op donderdag 04-06-2009 om 10:46 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Anthony
W. Youngman:
> >I think that's a pretty usual setup (most people I know have a 32bit version
> >of Linux installed on their laptop even though their CPU is actually a
> >64bit).
Sometimes it makes sense to "do what most peopl
In message <200905312229.35014.reinh...@kainhofer.com>, Reinhold
Kainhofer writes
Am Sonntag, 31. Mai 2009 21:22:41 schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen:
Op zaterdag 30-05-2009 om 22:46 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> Any more tips? I'd really like to get this working so I can make
> re
Op woensdag 03-06-2009 om 04:06 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> Ok, it works with self.settings, and it's required for darwin__ppc
> and darwin__x86. I'm not certain if you'd rather put one code
> block into the main odcctools class, or add subclasses for both
> __ppc and __x86.
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 04:30:36PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Op dinsdag 02-06-2009 om 07:02 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
> Percival:
> > AttributeError: 'Odcctools__darwin__x86' object has no attribute
> > 'build_bits'
>
> Ah, that should prolly be self.settings. I'll wait a bit u
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 04:30:36PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Op dinsdag 02-06-2009 om 07:02 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
> Percival:
> > 1) this affects darwin-x86, not darwin-ppc. (at least, I haven't
> > tested darwin-ppc, only darwin-x86).
>
> Interesting. I missed that bit.
Op dinsdag 02-06-2009 om 07:02 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 12:28:29PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> > Op dinsdag 02-06-2009 om 03:05 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
> > Percival:
> >
> > > Anyway, with this patch, the darwin-x86::cross/gcc buil
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 12:28:29PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Op dinsdag 02-06-2009 om 03:05 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
> Percival:
>
> > Anyway, with this patch, the darwin-x86::cross/gcc build
> > succeedes:
>
> Great. I've just pushed this, with an extra if:
>
> if s
Op dinsdag 02-06-2009 om 03:05 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> Anyway, with this patch, the darwin-x86::cross/gcc build
> succeedes:
Great. I've just pushed this, with an extra if:
if self.build_bits == '32' and self.build_hardware_bits == '64':
to narrow down the chan
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 09:12:35AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Op zondag 31-05-2009 om 22:49 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
> Percival:
>
> > None of the other places I put -fno-stack-protector had any
> > effect, so I was just trying everything. :(
>
> Yeah, I know that mode. Somet
Op maandag 01-06-2009 om 05:23 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> I'm not convinced that GUB even knows which file to use; the build
> commands contain "-O2 -g -g -O2 -O2 -O2 -g -g -O2". Surely only
> one "-O2 -g" matters?
Yes, this has little to do with GUB. In an autotools buil
Op zondag 31-05-2009 om 22:49 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> Anybody else? Particularly on ubuntu systems?
FWIW, I'm doing GUB builds on ubuntu.
> None of the other places I put -fno-stack-protector had any
> effect, so I was just trying everything. :(
Yeah, I know that mode
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 09:20:24PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> diff --git a/gub/specs/darwin/odcctools.py b/gub/specs/darwin/odcctools.py
> index ee953c0..1d24944 100644
I'm getting very confused trying to figure out what file affects
the darwin-x86::cross/gcc compilations. Candidates are:
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 09:20:24PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> diff --git a/gub/specs/darwin/odcctools.py b/gub/specs/darwin/odcctools.py
> index ee953c0..1d24944 100644
> --- a/gub/specs/darwin/odcctools.py
> +++ b/gub/specs/darwin/odcctools.py
> @@ -62,3 +62,8 @@ cd %(install_prefix)s%(cros
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 09:20:24PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Op zaterdag 30-05-2009 om 22:46 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
> Percival:
>
> > Who has successfully built GUB?
>
> Me! :-)
Anybody else? Particularly on ubuntu systems?
> > def compile_command (self):
> >
Am Sonntag, 31. Mai 2009 21:22:41 schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen:
> Op zaterdag 30-05-2009 om 22:46 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
>
> Percival:
> > Any more tips? I'd really like to get this working so I can make
> > releases.
>
> Oh, you can also try to not waste your hardware resources and con
Op zaterdag 30-05-2009 om 22:46 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> Any more tips? I'd really like to get this working so I can make
> releases.
Oh, you can also try to not waste your hardware resources and confuse
softwary by just installing 64 bits ;-)
Can you build everything el
Op zaterdag 30-05-2009 om 22:46 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:
> Who has successfully built GUB?
Me!
:-)
> def compile_command (self):
> os.putenv('CFLAGS', '-fno-stack-protector ')
> return (cross.AutoBuild.compile_command (self))
> to the class Gcc (cross.Au
Who has successfully built GUB? I'm still struggling on
kainhofer, which I believe is running an Ubuntu 32-bit version,
on a 64-bit CPU.
I'm still stuck on the same cross/gcc problem from a few months
ago:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-03/msg00356.html
at the time, Han-We
20 matches
Mail list logo
