[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-libsigsegv] new clisp/libffcall/libsigsegv for testing

From: Mojca Miklavec
Subject: Re: [bug-libsigsegv] new clisp/libffcall/libsigsegv for testing
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 05:13:04 +0200

Dear Bruno,

On 18 April 2017 at 00:51, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Mojca,
> You wrote in <http://tug.org/pipermail/tlbuild/2017q2/003774.html>
> (and I couldn't reply earlier because I'm not subscribed to that list
> and you didn't CC me):
>> I optimistically tried to cross-compile on Mac OS X, but libffcall
>> fails to detect the proper architecture and libsigsegv's "make check"
>> fails. I'll try to see if I can trick the compiler to avoid having to
>> go to a different machine with different architecture just for the
>> sake of compiling clisp (the rest of TL works just fine this way).
> None of clisp/libffcall/libsigsegv supports effortless cross-compilation
> because:
>   * libffcall and libsigsegv run behavioral tests at configure time
>     (cf. AC_RUN_IFELSE),

I checked libffcall and I only found one such test. The libsigsegv
library contains more, but in the context of cross-compilation on
Darwin that should not really be an issue since cross-compiled
binaries can be executed. (It's not cross-compiling in the same sense
as when compiling Windows binaries on a Linux box.)

If nothing else, I've seen x86_64-solaris on your list of target
platforms. I'm not sure about all dirty details, but from what I
understand one cannot install 32-bit or 64-bit system. There's only
one OS and one can either compile 32-bit or 64-bit binaries, depending
on the compiler (options). Both binaries run fine. That sounds like
exactly the same kind of "problem" to me.

I haven't been compiling xindy for Solaris so far, but in case I set
up the automated builds, I could get those as a bonus.

>   * clisp creates memory images as part of its build process, and these
>     memory images are highly platform dependent (on the memory word size
>     in particular).

I don't yet understand how these memory images are created, but before
I could compile clisp I would have to compile the other two libraries
which currently fail.

I understand that this won't be possible with zero effort, but I
wonder whether the effort is reasonable and whether you would be
willing to help and include patches in the sources, so that I wouldn't
have to keep a local database of patches. I would like to set up fully
automated builds and would (consciously) like to avoid having to stack
up piles of hardware from nineties just for the sake of being able to
compile a single binary.

If that's feasible, I'll compile xindy, else I'll probably let it skip
(or ask others to compile it; I don't have any i386-darwin machine). I
don't mind spending a bit of extra effort, but I probably cannot do
that alone.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]