Hi, On Sep 8, 2012 2:37 PM, "Martin Storsjö" <mar...@martin.st> wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Sep 2012, Måns Rullgård wrote: > >> Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Martin Storsjö <mar...@martin.st> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 8 Sep 2012, Måns Rullgård wrote: >>>> >>>> Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Ronald S. Bultje <rsbul...@gmail.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This sounds like the wrong fix tbh. The first chunk looks OK but >>>>>>> wouldn't other systems, eg old GCC versions, be similarly affected? >>>>>>> Shouldn't the true fix live elsewhere, ie fix the log2() check? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> The log2 check is fine in theory. The linker somewhere finds a log2 >>>>>> function to link in, but without a function declaration in the header. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Find out where that log2 is coming from and what it really is. >>>>> >>>> >>>> It seems that the log2 is present in the static libc that MSVC normally >>>> uses (but not in the dynamically loaded one), and the headers don't contain >>>> any declaration of it. >>>> >>>> >>> And only in the 64-bit version. How odd. >>> >>> Still, something goes wrong when it trys to use it, causing fate to fail. >> >> >> If you have an implicit declaration for it returning int, it can't >> possibly work. > > > It seems to work fine if a manual declaration of the function (double log2(double);) is added.
Does msdn mention the existence of this at all? Ronald
_______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
