Re: variables, mostly private, not included into debug symbols list on -g3 -ggdb settings

2022-06-29 Thread Ariel Burbaickij
Hello Duncan, Interesting branch to take -- I have not checked it myself but there are claims that DWARF-4 (has to be written this way too in options) is Turing-Complete -- but no, still the same in terms of information available -- which starts to look seriously strange. Kind Regards Ariel

Re: variables, mostly private, not included into debug symbols list on -g3 -ggdb settings

2022-06-29 Thread Duncan Roe
Hi Ariel, On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 12:38:49AM +0200, Ariel Burbaickij wrote: > Hello list, > any idea why private variables from C++ source files are not included into > symbols list with -g3 and -ggdb compilation settings in gcc version 11.3.0 > under Cygwin. Like that, roughly: > > grep

Re: Cannot see plot with qt graphics_tool kit on octave-6.4.0

2022-06-29 Thread Tatsuro MATSUOKA
> - Original Message - > I cannot see a plot with qt graphics_toolkit. > > >> graphics_tookit qt; > >> plot(1:10); > > plot window is filed with black. > > I met this on two different PCs. > > On one PC, > >> plot(1:10); > Xlib: sequence lost (0x11a61 > 0x1a63) in reply type 0x0! >

variables, mostly private, not included into debug symbols list on -g3 -ggdb settings

2022-06-29 Thread Ariel Burbaickij
Hello list, any idea why private variables from C++ source files are not included into symbols list with -g3 and -ggdb compilation settings in gcc version 11.3.0 under Cygwin. Like that, roughly: grep isInProgress * :bool isInProgress; $nm -Cal |grep isInProgress $ So, watchpoints

Re: [PATCH setup] Add perpetual support for preremove scripts

2022-06-29 Thread Christian Franke
Christian Franke wrote: Jon Turney wrote: On 26/06/2022 17:33, Christian Franke wrote: ... This patch adds the missing functionality to run the pre-install hook. It is limited to /etc/preremove/0p_* because there is possibly no use case for /etc/preremove/zp_*. Thanks. I'm not sure what

Re: [patch] cygport : update to python 3.9

2022-06-29 Thread Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty
On 29/06/2022 16:36, Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty wrote: On 31/12/2021 10:00, Marco Atzeri wrote: Attached patch moves "default" from 3.6 to 3.9 Additional changes:   Remove 3.5 from all   Change future to 3.10 Other point: As 3.5 was never reall deployed, I think we can remove it from the

Re: chmod g+s ineffective

2022-06-29 Thread Norton Allen
On 6/29/2022 9:18 AM, Norton Allen wrote: On 6/29/2022 7:39 AM, Andrey Repin wrote: Greetings, Norton Allen! On one machine I have, chmod g+s fails to set the sticky bit. The command does not return any error, but ls -l continues to show the bit not set. $ mkdir foo $ chgrp flight

Re: [patch] cygport : update to python 3.9

2022-06-29 Thread Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty
On 29/06/2022 16:46, Marco Atzeri wrote: On 29.06.2022 17:36, Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty wrote: On 31/12/2021 10:00, Marco Atzeri wrote: Attached patch moves "default" from 3.6 to 3.9 Additional changes:   Remove 3.5 from all   Change future to 3.10 Other point: As 3.5 was never reall

Re: [patch] cygport : update to python 3.9

2022-06-29 Thread Marco Atzeri
On 29.06.2022 17:36, Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty wrote: On 31/12/2021 10:00, Marco Atzeri wrote: Attached patch moves "default" from 3.6 to 3.9 Additional changes:   Remove 3.5 from all   Change future to 3.10 Other point: As 3.5 was never reall deployed, I think we can remove it from the

Re: [patch] cygport : update to python 3.9

2022-06-29 Thread Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty
On 31/12/2021 10:00, Marco Atzeri wrote: Attached patch moves "default" from 3.6 to 3.9 Additional changes:  Remove 3.5 from all  Change future to 3.10 Other point: As 3.5 was never reall deployed, I think we can remove it from the distibution. As we have a lot of python3-* is obsoleded

Re: [PATCH setup] Add perpetual support for preremove scripts

2022-06-29 Thread Christian Franke
Jon Turney wrote: On 26/06/2022 17:33, Christian Franke wrote: Use case: I ITP etckeeper (https://etckeeper.branchable.com/) which I frequently use on Debian. For fully automatic operation, it requires pre-install and post-install hooks, e.g: /etc/preremove/0p_000_etckeeper_pre-install.sh

Re: chmod g+s ineffective

2022-06-29 Thread Norton Allen
On 6/29/2022 7:39 AM, Andrey Repin wrote: Greetings, Norton Allen! On one machine I have, chmod g+s fails to set the sticky bit. The command does not return any error, but ls -l continues to show the bit not set. $ mkdir foo $ chgrp flight foo $ chmod g+ws foo $ ls -ld foo

Re: [PATCH setup] Add perpetual support for preremove scripts

2022-06-29 Thread Jon Turney
On 26/06/2022 17:33, Christian Franke wrote: Use case: I ITP etckeeper (https://etckeeper.branchable.com/) which I frequently use on Debian. For fully automatic operation, it requires pre-install and post-install hooks, e.g: /etc/preremove/0p_000_etckeeper_pre-install.sh

Re: chmod g+s ineffective

2022-06-29 Thread Andrey Repin
Greetings, Norton Allen! > On one machine I have, chmod g+s fails to set the sticky bit. The command > does not return any error, but ls -l continues to show the bit not set. > $ mkdir foo > $ chgrp flight foo > $ chmod g+ws foo > $ ls -ld foo > drwxrwxr-x+ 1 nort flight 0

chmod g+s ineffective

2022-06-29 Thread Norton Allen
On one machine I have, chmod g+s fails to set the sticky bit. The command does not return any error, but ls -l continues to show the bit not set. $ mkdir foo $ chgrp flight foo $ chmod g+ws foo $ ls -ld foo drwxrwxr-x+ 1 nort flight 0 Jun 29 06:50 foo I ran strace, and it looks

Re: [ITP] etckeeper 1.18.17-1

2022-06-29 Thread Adam Dinwoodie
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 09:55:10AM +0200, Christian Franke wrote: > Christian Franke wrote: > > Adam Dinwoodie wrote: > > ... > > > > > I'm also vaguely pondering whether it's worth adding git as a > > > dependency.  That's not strictly right, since etckeeper doesn't *need* > > > git, but it's

Re: [ITP] etckeeper 1.18.17-1

2022-06-29 Thread Christian Franke
Christian Franke wrote: Adam Dinwoodie wrote: ... I'm also vaguely pondering whether it's worth adding git as a dependency.  That's not strictly right, since etckeeper doesn't *need* git, but it's going to be the use case for 99.9% of users, and in the absence of Cygwin having a "recommends"