Bug#309196: Bug#307231: RageIRCd build failure on s390
Thanks. So I can upload the patched version to unstable, fixing the s390 issue? Yes :-) It is an issue which makes the current rageircd unsuitable for release with a stable version. We have missed sarge anyway, so the package wouldn't migrate from unstable to testing anyway. That bug report doesn't really hurt and is a reminder that the zlib issue still needs to be sorted out. Aye. (Any way the package can be pushed through quickly? Nobody will notice! ;p Hehehehehe.) lol. Regards Alasdair -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#309196: Bug#307231: RageIRCd build failure on s390
Hi, On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 10:19:08PM +0100, Alasdair McWilliam wrote: > I expect you know more than me about this so I'll go with the patch > you've given. Thanks. So I can upload the patched version to unstable, fixing the s390 issue? > Is it possible to close the other bug associated with rageircd as > it's not really a bug? It is an issue which makes the current rageircd unsuitable for release with a stable version. We have missed sarge anyway, so the package wouldn't migrate from unstable to testing anyway. That bug report doesn't really hurt and is a reminder that the zlib issue still needs to be sorted out. Greetings Marc -- - Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things."Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#309196: Bug#307231: RageIRCd build failure on s390
I expect you know more than me about this so I'll go with the patch you've given. Thanks for your input on this issue too it's really appreciated. :-) I'll re-fix the BLUEMOON branch tomorrow evening probably. Is it possible to close the other bug associated with rageircd as it's not really a bug? Cheers On 16 May 2005, at 17:16, Florian Weimer wrote: * Marc Haber: +#if defined(__GNUC__) || (defined(__powerpc__) && defined (__FreeBSD__)) #define VA_COPY __va_copy +#elif defined(__powerpc__) && defined(__NetBSD__) +#define VA_COPY va_copy #else #define VA_COPY(x, y) x = y #endif Would that be ok with both of you? __va_copy is provided by GCC's as well, so this patch should be fine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#309196: Bug#307231: RageIRCd build failure on s390
* Marc Haber: > +#if defined(__GNUC__) || (defined(__powerpc__) && defined(__FreeBSD__)) > #define VA_COPY __va_copy > +#elif defined(__powerpc__) && defined(__NetBSD__) > +#define VA_COPY va_copy > #else > #define VA_COPY(x, y) x = y > #endif > > Would that be ok with both of you? __va_copy is provided by GCC's as well, so this patch should be fine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#309196: Bug#307231: RageIRCd build failure on s390
Hi Alasdair, On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 04:21:15PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Alasdair McWilliam: > > Change to: > > > > AC_CHECK_FUNCS([times index rindex setlinebuf va_copy __va_copy]) > > va_copy is a macro, so this check won't work reliably. Florian usually knows what he is talking about, so I'd rather refrain from applying your patch. > On Debian, it's safe to use va_copy unconditionally because it's part > of GCC's header. Knowing that rageircd is not only meant for Debian, I'd suggest using the code from Thiemo, patch repeated: --- ./include/common.h 2004-12-07 03:04:34.0 + +++ /tmp/dpep-work.aVeWMw/rageircd-2.0.0/include/common.h 2005-05-15 14:07:40.192791162 + @@ -48,17 +48,10 @@ #define ASSERT(xx) #endif -/* VA_COPY - namely for x86_64 and PowerPC architectures. - * Copyright Rossi 'vejeta' Marcello ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - */ -#ifdef __powerpc__ -#ifdef __NetBSD__ -#define VA_COPY va_copy -#elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__linux__) -#define VA_COPY __va_copy -#endif -#elif defined(__x86_64) +#if defined(__GNUC__) || (defined(__powerpc__) && defined(__FreeBSD__)) #define VA_COPY __va_copy +#elif defined(__powerpc__) && defined(__NetBSD__) +#define VA_COPY va_copy #else #define VA_COPY(x, y) x = y #endif Would that be ok with both of you? Greetings Marc -- - Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things."Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#309196: Bug#307231: RageIRCd build failure on s390
* Alasdair McWilliam: > Change to: > > AC_CHECK_FUNCS([times index rindex setlinebuf va_copy __va_copy]) va_copy is a macro, so this check won't work reliably. On Debian, it's safe to use va_copy unconditionally because it's part of GCC's header. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#309196: Bug#307231: RageIRCd build failure on s390
Package: rageircd Version: 2.0.0-2 Hi Marc, Apologies for not getting back to you sooner - I've been working hard. I've got around to the proper bug fix so bare with me. Firstly, replace all the current VA_COPY declaration statements in include/common.h with: #ifdef HAVE___VA_COPY #define VA_COPY __va_copy #elif defined(HAVE_VA_COPY) #define VA_COPY va_copy #else #define VA_COPY(x, y) x = y #endif Secondly, in configure.ac line 281: AC_CHECK_FUNCS([times index rindex setlinebuf]) Change to: AC_CHECK_FUNCS([times index rindex setlinebuf va_copy __va_copy]) Thirdly, re-generate the rage2 autoconf. For this just execute ./ config -a. You will see: persephone$ ./config -a Rebuilding configure... done! Rebuilding include/setup.h.in... done! From here, do a make distclean to erase any junk and re-configure as normal. Configure should detect the type of va_copy implementation on the host architecture and set itself up accordingly. :) Once again apologies for the delay. I know this e-mail isn't very professional of me but I haven't got time to back-port the changes to a clean 2.0.0 and patch. This code will be going into the BLUEMOON branch today. (Build 100 I think.) Regards Alasdair On 15 May 2005, at 15:20, Marc Haber wrote: Thiemo Seufer suggests replacing the entire VA_COPY detection code with: #if defined(__GNUC__) || (defined(__powerpc__) && defined (__FreeBSD__)) #define VA_COPY __va_copy #elif defined(__powerpc__) && defined(__NetBSD__) #define VA_COPY va_copy #else #define VA_COPY(x, y) x = y #endif With that page, a binary is created on s390 (cannot verify whether it is actually runnable), and a working binary is created on i386. Please indicate whether that fix would be appropriate for you as I don't want to have a package in Debian that deviates too far from your work. Greetings Marc -- -- --- Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things."Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
