To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User hjs changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User hjs changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 15 18:37:32 -0800
2007 ---
Oops! Patch committed to dmake47. Thanks!
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 15 09:37:02 -0800
2007 ---
i verified the initial testcase makefiles - and it looked like expected. also
check
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 2 14:41:29 -0800
2007 ---
A small update with respect to spawn and parallel execution. The
cygwin1-20070101.d
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 21 21:37:42 -0800
2006 ---
Oops, committed.
-
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 21 10:21:45 -0800
2006 ---
unix/runargv.c is still too verbose to survive testcases.
--- runargv.c 21 Dec 2
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 20 19:17:13 -0800
2006 ---
Committed a not-so verbose version of the last patch.
Please verify.
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 20 09:16:17 -0800
2006 ---
fine with me.
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 20 08:55:54 -0800
2006 ---
Thanks for testing.
I wouldn't be worried about the:
dmake: Warning: -- Internal
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 20 01:14:05 -0800
2006 ---
did an update of my cygwin to 1.5.23 and started another round of torturing
dmake (
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Dec 16 11:57:19 -0800
2006 ---
@ause: I tested the previous patch with OOo and the short testcases. It should
work
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 11 06:36:12 -0800
2006 ---
Hi Ause,
no idea (and no possible chance to fix) the unbreakability but I think I
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 11 01:19:22 -0800
2006 ---
same settings, except that i needed -P4 today to get the "unbreakablility":
- start
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 8 18:00:55 -0800
2006 ---
Small correction: I can produce the unbreakability now.
If I start cygwin.bat and
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 8 16:44:10 -0800
2006 ---
Just for the record, the "unbreakability" of the dmake / spawn version seems to
com
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 6 10:26:44 -0800
2006 ---
The last patch adds:
@@ -527,10 +539,14 @@
}
while( Wait_for_chi
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 6 03:28:43 -0800
2006 ---
correction: breaking is no problem with the sample makefile. in "real life"
(sc/sou
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 6 02:12:18 -0800
2006 ---
my findings on a different machine (dual core) - will check on the previuos
later:
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 5 15:52:56 -0800
2006 ---
$%#$* Grmpf!
I just tested with a cygwin dmake *without* --enable-spawn (using for
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 5 15:18:27 -0800
2006 ---
Well, it looks like we found a nice bug in cygwin.
I tried the following makefile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 5 07:42:19 -0800
2006 ---
with the latest patch dmake -P6 is still almost unstoppable.
at the end i get this
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 4 11:19:52 -0800
2006 ---
> sometimes the last patch causes dmake to be almost "unbreakable", especially
> wi
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 4 08:34:22 -0800
2006 ---
sometimes the last patch causes dmake to be almost "unbreakable", especially
with -
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Dec 3 21:25:57 -0800
2006 ---
@ause: The previous patch (uncommitted) might improve dmake's process handling
when
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 30 09:21:15 -0800
2006 ---
latest patch seems to have some issues.
easy one: run dmake with no makefile around
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 27 14:25:24 -0800
2006 ---
Thanks! Committed after doing a testbuild (MAXPROCESS=2) with this patch on
W32-bas
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 27 06:55:44 -0800
2006 ---
up to now i just did some (single process) testbuilds on various platforms an
ran t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 16 12:47:25 -0800
2006 ---
The following section is mainly meant for myself to explain why the
previous patch
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
User vq changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 20 21:40:26 -0700
2006 ---
If Wait_for_completion is TRUE (this can only happen for ruleop '!', building
.INCL
47 matches
Mail list logo