[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure
From: |
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso |
Subject: |
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure |
Date: |
Thu, 8 May 2008 19:59:35 -0500 |
On 08/05/2008, Francesco Potorti` <address@hidden> wrote:
> >If no one runs on a 64-bit platform none of the bugs of 64-bit systems
> >will be found.
>
>
> I am running a dual core amd64 with Debian testing, and I see no
> problems with Octave. Isn't that built with 64 bits?
Did you compile with --enable-64? Octave has some experimental 64bit
features that aren't enabled by default.
The other segfaults I was mentioning weren't in regards to Octave, but
to other things (and I'm suspecting that Octaviz is having similar
problems, but I'm still waiting for confirmation that the segfault I'm
seeing is a 64bit problem).
- Jordi G. H.
- RE: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, (continued)
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, David Bateman, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Francesco Potorti`, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, John W. Eaton, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Sergei Steshenko, 2008/05/09
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, John W. Eaton, 2008/05/09
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Sergei Steshenko, 2008/05/09
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure,
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <=
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Przemek Klosowski, 2008/05/09
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Francesco Potorti`, 2008/05/12
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2008/05/08