On Wed, 03 Aug 2011, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote:
What do your mean exactly by sorted ?
sorted using the 'sort' program ?
sorted like the un-mangled symbols ?
IIRC it's sorted alphabetically on the string that appears in the symbols
file (i.e. un-mangeld symbol in your case). The tags are
Le Thu, 4 Aug 2011 08:02:44 +0200,
Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org a écrit :
IIRC it's sorted alphabetically on the string that appears in the symbols
file (i.e. un-mangeld symbol in your case). The tags are ignored for the
sort.
ok In fact my symbols where alphabetically sorted using
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
Indeed symbol ordering may vary, but also there is no reason for
dpkg-gensymbols
to guarantee a particular ordering.
Well, dpkg-gensymbols does sort the symbols files. Precisely so that
diff are meaningful. Otherwise they would be useless.
Code
Le Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:26:05 +0200,
Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org a écrit :
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
Indeed symbol ordering may vary, but also there is no reason for
dpkg-gensymbols
to guarantee a particular ordering.
Well, dpkg-gensymbols does sort the
Le Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:09:05 +0100,
Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org a écrit :
Hi again,
Le Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:45:53 +0100,
Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org a écrit :
- Use the c++ tag to move to human-readable symbols and get rid of
problems due
to different name
Le Mon, 1 Aug 2011 10:35:53 +0200,
Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net a écrit :
Hi,
Looks like you have architecture (or endian) specific symbols. You
probably have to make architecture specific symbols files in this case.
In case you would like to see an example I know of [1], which uses a
Hi,
[...]
Yes that is why I try to apply the generated patch and it does not work for
exemple
this hunk took from the armel architecture
[...]
as you can see the patch generated by dpkg-gensymbols can not apply.
Indeed symbols are not ordered the same way ??? Maybe this is due to the
* Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org [110801 11:15]:
Indeed symbol ordering may vary, but also there is no reason for
dpkg-gensymbols
to guarantee a particular ordering. Although dpkg-gensymbols produces a diff,
this is surely not meant for you to apply directly as a patch: each change
Hello
I just added the symbol files to one of my packages [1], which provided two C++
libraries.
I solved by hand the build failure for the first on (liblog4tango4).
I would like your opinion about my fix [2]. I am not sure that I did the right
things.
Is seems that a few of the missing
Hi Frédéric,
I just added the symbol files to one of my packages [1], which provided two
C++ libraries.
I solved by hand the build failure for the first on (liblog4tango4).
I would like your opinion about my fix [2]. I am not sure that I did the
right things.
Is seems that a few of the
Le Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:45:53 +0100,
Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org a écrit :
- Use the c++ tag to move to human-readable symbols and get rid of problems
due
to different name mangling schemes.
yes it is nicer with c++ tag, is there an automatic way to convert a symbol
file to
this
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:11:47AM +0200, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote:
It seems that my i386 package contain mmx instructions, is it allow ?
Sadly, no. It must work on a real 80486.
You may have an alternate code path for 80586 and higher, though, and choose
them at runtime.
On amd64 you
Hi again,
Le Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:45:53 +0100,
Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org a écrit :
- Use the c++ tag to move to human-readable symbols and get rid of problems
due
to different name mangling schemes.
yes it is nicer with c++ tag, is there an automatic way to convert a
Hi Picca (2011.07.29_10:11:47_+0200)
Is there a link somewhere explaining by examples how to deal with thoses
MISSING symbols
or differences of implementations ?
Is there a sort of concatenator script, which take all the build log and
generate a unique symbol file
with arch tags ?
It's
14 matches
Mail list logo
