[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ultrix and 'missing'?
From: |
Harlan Stenn |
Subject: |
Re: ultrix and 'missing'? |
Date: |
Fri, 18 May 2001 02:04:39 -0400 |
The failure is happening on a SunOS 4.1.3 box with "cc" and GNU make
(3.76.1). The build is being done outside of the source tree:
% mkdir A.`config.guess`
% cd !$
% ../configure
% make
As I recall, the problem did not happen on a 4.1.3 box with gcc and GNU
make 3.74 .
I'm trying to install CVS automake now (from subversions.gnu.org - is
this copy different form the one at sourceware.cygnus.com?). I have to
upgrade perl first (5.003 is installed at the moment).
OK, this won't happen with the stock C compiler. This will take some
work. I'll see what I can do. I'll need to do this on some other box
and then try the tests on the 4.1.3/cc box.
When will ansi5.test be checked in?
H
--
> What I'd really like is a way to see the failure with GNU make and gcc
> (ansi5.test does this and then does a couple small hacks to fool the
> build into thinking that ansi2knr is required). If I had this then I
> could debug it here.
>
> Failing that, a simple test which fails on your box with your compiler
> would help. I might have access to a similar box, in which case I
> could find out what is wrong.
>
> One problem is that right now I don't have a theory of what is going
> wrong. I looked at the Makefiles from ansi5.test and they look fine
> to me. And if I can't reproduce it, unfortunately that means you'll
> probably have to figure out how to debug it :-(.
>
> What system are you using? What make are you using? What compiler?
> Are you building the source tree or in a separate tree?
>
> Sometimes `make' will have a flag that prints debugging information.
> So you might take a look through that to see if it is interesting.
> Perhaps we've simply run into a bug or limitation in your make which
> we must then work around.
>
> Tom
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, (continued)
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/10
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/10
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/10
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Akim Demaille, 2001/05/12
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/12
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/12
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/18
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/18
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/17
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/18
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?,
Harlan Stenn <=
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/18
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/18
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/19
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/19
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/19
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/20
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/20
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Akim Demaille, 2001/05/21
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Tom Tromey, 2001/05/21
- Re: ultrix and 'missing'?, Harlan Stenn, 2001/05/21