Hi!
On Mon, 5 May 2014 23:49:33 -0400, Samuel Bronson naes...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/6/14, Thomas Schwinge tho...@codesourcery.com wrote:
Sorry for the delay, and thanks for the patches you posted. Here are
three patches, based on yours, that I intend to apply if there are no
further
On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 12:52 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Svante Signell, le Fri 02 May 2014 12:45:56 +0200, a écrit :
On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 12:00 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Samuel Thibault, le Fri 02 May 2014 11:57:53 +0200, a écrit :
So we just need to fix guardsize in our
Hi,
Attached are patches to enable gccgo to build properly on Debian
GNU/Hurd on gcc-4.9 (4.9-4.9.0-1). With split stack enabled 95 libgo
tests PASS and 27 FAIL. Many of the failed tests do fail only in a few
sub-tests. patch0.diff is debian specific, while the rest are for
upstream.
(continued)
patch4.diff: src/libgo/go/syscall/libcall_posix-1.go: New file, a copy
of libcall_posix.go with the mount, mlockall and munlockall calls
removed. mount/umount functionality exists but is currently part of
Hurd utilities, the outhe two functions are not yet implemented.
patch5.diff:
(continued)
patch7.diff: src/libgo/go/syscall/wait.c
Set WCONTINUED to zero if not defined (same fix as for lto in gcc-4.9)
patch8.diff: src/libgo/mksysinfo.sh
Add special treatment of EWOULDBLOCK, SYS_FCNTL and st_dev since they
are either not defined or defined differently for the script to
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 10:58:38 +0200, a écrit :
The patch for st_dev by Thomas Schwinge was not liked by Samuel
Uh?
I said “These should be fine, however.” and “a sed rule can't hurt even
if there is no occurrence...”
So just keep that precise part back as it was, no need for
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 14:13:54 +0200, a écrit :
And you wrote in your reply to the above: see e.g.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00644.html
These should be fine, however.
These here meant as: what is below, not what is above.
Samuel
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 14:25 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 14:13:54 +0200, a écrit :
And you wrote in your reply to the above: see e.g.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00644.html
These should be fine, however.
These here meant as: what is
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 14:33:18 +0200, a écrit :
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 14:25 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 14:13:54 +0200, a écrit :
And you wrote in your reply to the above: see e.g.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00644.html
Just to explicitly ask for it:
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 10:06:49 +0200, a écrit :
For some (yet) unknown reason all libgo tests fails with a segfault when
run in the build tree: make, sh or something else, the test commands are
rather hard to track.
Doesn't that dump a core? Do you
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 14:51 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Just to explicitly ask for it:
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 10:06:49 +0200, a écrit :
For some (yet) unknown reason all libgo tests fails with a segfault when
run in the build tree: make, sh or something else, the test
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 15:05:20 +0200, a écrit :
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 14:51 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Just to explicitly ask for it:
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 10:06:49 +0200, a écrit :
For some (yet) unknown reason all libgo tests fails with a segfault when
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 15:07 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 15:05:20 +0200, a écrit :
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 14:51 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Just to explicitly ask for it:
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 10:06:49 +0200, a écrit :
For some
Svante Signell, le Tue 06 May 2014 14:13:54 +0200, a écrit :
+# Special treatment of EWOULDBLOCK for GNU/Hurd
+# /usr/include/bits/errno.h: #define EWOULDBLOCK EAGAIN
+egrep '^const EWOULDBLOCK = Errno(_EWOULDBLOCK)' ${OUT} | \
+sed -i.bak -e 's/_EWOULDBLOCK/_EAGAIN/' ${OUT}
+
Hi,
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Do you have HWCLOCKACCESS enabled in /etc/default/hwclock and rcS?
Otherwise I don't see how a BIOS manages to let an OS disturb its RTC...
The line is commented out.
# Set this to yes if it is possible to access the hardware clock,
# or no if it is not.
15 matches
Mail list logo
