Martin,

Could you please have a look at pwlib1 on 10.5 ?
I'm committing now, thanks to your msg,  a small
additional item, that should fix Alexander's psetgrp issue
on 10.5 w/o change on 10.4.

There is an additional (10.5) possible issue about semaphores,
apparently implicitly raised in a "patch file" attached
to a "bug report" (#1961744). The submitter doesn't
even specify what problem the patch is trying to fix,
_ even just, if it is a build problem, as I think is meant,
the compile command and corresponding error msg...
A fortiori there is no analysis whatsoever...
(And further, I don't trust his system, since you
showed me his "cp" command gave non-standard output...)

It just implies that he thinks that on his system  the equivalent
of an additional line in the patchscript  like (exactly) :
>   sed -ri.bak -e '/SEM_FAILED/s,\(int\),,' src/ptlib/unix/tlibthrd.cxx

might _ help ? be usefull ? be needed ??

The whole thing concerns lines 1548 to 1568 in src/ptlib/unix/ 
tlibthrd.cxx
(and /usr/include/sys/semaphore.h ).

Requests for additional information have been fruitless...
W/o access for the moment to a 10.5 system, the only 2 things
I can say about this are :

_ on 10.4, it doesn't work :
> c++ -Wno-long-double -D_REENTRANT -Wall  -D__MACOSX__ -m486 - 
> DUSE_ESD=1 -I/sw/.bld/pwlib1-1.10.10-2/pwlib-1.10.10/include -O2 - 
> O3 -fno-common -dynamic -fno-common -dynamic -fno-common -dynamic - 
> fno-exceptions -fno-exceptions -fno-exceptions -fno-exceptions -c  
> tlib.cxx -o /sw/.bld/pwlib1-1.10.10-2/pwlib-1.10.10/lib/ 
> obj_Darwin_x86_r/tlib.o
> tlibthrd.cxx: In member function 'sem_t* PSemaphore::CreateSem 
> (unsigned int)':
> tlibthrd.cxx:1565: error: ISO C++ forbids comparison between  
> pointer and integer

_ but, according to http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/ 
functions/sem_open.html,
SEM_FAILED is the \emph{value} (as opposed to "address" there)  
returned by sem_open in case of failure,
so there might be some logic in that no coercion should be needed,  
when taking things literally.
Of course, I don't see how they could implement easily (or jjust  
declare..) in C a function that returns
in one case a value and otherwise a pointer.   So I'm at a loss here,  
w/o access to a 10.5 system...

  So _ please Martin, do whatever you want with that pkg and bug- 
tracker item; I can't without a proper
bug-report. Before changing anything, I need to understand anything  
related, and w/o proper
bug-report, nor access to a 10.5 system, I can't..

Thanks so much in advance . . !

Jean-Francois


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Fink-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users

Reply via email to