Re: [Gcl-devel] troubles bulding Maxima with latest GCL CVS

[Camm Maguire]

Greetings!

"Vadim V. Zhytnikov" <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi!
> 
> I've troubles in building Maxima with latest GCL CVS.
> 
> With Maxima 5.6 something wrong with Makefiles.
> I have not identified the real source of the trouble but
> if you look at makefile in Maxima /src dir you can see
> 
> LISP=saved_ansi_gcl
> 
> Which is wrong since full path to saved GCL image is required.
> Previously there are no such line and make looked for
> gcl in $(PORTDIR)/saved_....
> 

OK, I think I've fixed this.



> With Maxima 5.9 trouble is entirely different. If I use
> latest GCL CVS compiled with --disable-bfd then
> everything is fine. But is bfd is enabled then
> I've got the following error
> ---------------------------------------------------
> ;      - Loading binary file "binary-gcl/comm2.o"
> Loading binary-gcl/comm2.o
> start address -T 898b000 Finished loading binary-gcl/comm2.o
> 
> ;    - Compiling module "evaluator"
> ;      - Loading binary file "binary-gcl/mlisp.o"
> Loading binary-gcl/mlisp.o
> Error in FUNCALL [or a callee]: This file was dumped with FASD version 0 
> not 2.
> 
> Fast links are on: do (use-fast-links nil) for debugging
> Broken at CONDITIONS::CLCS-LOAD.  Type :H for Help.
>   1 (Continue) Retry loading file "binary-gcl/mlisp.o".
>   2 (Abort) Return to top level.
> dbl:>>

I see this too, but

1) I'm confused.  I thought you said in your previous email that you
   could build amxima and pass all tests with the new stuff?

2) I'm having trouble debugging this, as all the new images are
   lacking (gdb) debugging symbols, due no doubt to the way we're
   building them.  Compiling with just -g, raw_gcl of course can be run
   find in gdb.  saved_trad_gcl is then made from raw_gcl at the lisp
   level, and also retains debugging symbols as shown when running
   under gdb.  (i.e. one has line number and source file information,
   etc.)  saved_maxima is made from saved_gcl (and in some cases
   raw_gcl) at the lisp level and likewise retains debugging symbols.
   But clcs/saved_full_gcl, pcl/saved_gcl_pcl, and
   unixport/saved_ansi_gcl all are missing debugging symbols, not only
   blocking my investigation of this issue, but also indicating
   something fishy to me about the way we're building these images.  

   I have a debugging reloc file, which basically does both the new
   bfd and the old hand coded one and compares, halting at
   mismatches.  No mismatches are found, but the error you see
   persists.  Also, building maxima 5.9 with saved_trad_gcl using bfd
   works fine.  So we seem to have an issue in the combination of bfd
   with the new inages.

   One thing I notice at saved_maxima and at saved_trad_gcl creation
   is the "Building raw symbol table" notifier.  This does not appear
   when building the new images.  These symbols are generated via the
   lisp function build-symbol-table, which must be getting called
   somewhere before save-system, though I cannot find it right now.  I
   don't think we are invoking this in the new image saves.  In
   general, the reloc code counts on the symbol table being generated
   at compile time, and statically available at run time.  I think,
   though, that the old reloc code could also build the table in case
   it was not initialized at runtime.  the new code does not yet have
   this capability, so perhaps I'll try adding this.  But to be sure,
   I need to be able to run gdb, which I can't now.  Can you help
   here, Vadim?

Take care,


> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Vadim
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gcl-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
> 
> 

-- 
Camm Maguire                                            address@hidden
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah