Greetings, and thank you again for your vital feedback. The solution
I've just implemented would have been impossible without it.
I'm pleased to announce a just-committed resolution to this issue,
bringing stability to gcl/maxima/acl2/axiom on ia64 and any future
platform like it which may use
Greetings, and thank you again for your vital feedback. The solution
I've just implemented would have been impossible without it.
I'm pleased to announce a just-committed resolution to this issue,
bringing stability to gcl/maxima/acl2/axiom on ia64 and any future
platform like it which may use
Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When I first read this, I was more confused by the meaning of the term
> 'local' and what I've been seeing.
Which is understandable, because I was confused, too. What you are
saying is correct.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greetings!
OK, I believe at long last I have a fix, but I'd like to make sure it
is not accidental, i.e. possibly vanishing with future ia64 toolchain
development.
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [removing emacs-devel from cc: since it's off-topic there.]
>
> Camm Maguire <[EMAI
[removing emacs-devel from cc: since it's off-topic there.]
Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Far better than trying to probe ld.so's function descriptor table, I
> should rather ammend the lisp compiler to write a static function
> structure into each produced C source file before compi
Greetings!
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Greetings!
> >
> > Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> > Was there ever a GNU emacs obstacle on ia64 linux, or am I confusing
> >> > the situation with xemacs?
> >>
> >> Since
Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greetings!
>
> Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > Was there ever a GNU emacs obstacle on ia64 linux, or am I confusing
>> > the situation with xemacs?
>>
>> Since GNU Emacs does not assign function pointers at runtime there was
>> never s
Greetings!
Apparently xemacs has faced a problem similar to the one GCL now
faces.
I've found the useful link:
http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-beta/200302/msg00029.html
I understand (I think) what the DYNAMIC_SYSCALL_FUNCADDR does, but I'm
still confused as to what problem it solves. I'v
Greetings!
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Was there ever a GNU emacs obstacle on ia64 linux, or am I confusing
> > the situation with xemacs?
>
> Since GNU Emacs does not assign function pointers at runtime there was
> never such a problem.
>
Could you please sketch how this i
If this is an issue about xemacs only, please omit emacs-devel from further
messages.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Stephen" == Stephen J Turnbull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Peter" == Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Well the version [of XEmacs] packaged for Debian on IA64 still
Peter> does not work: Bug #149088 in the debian bug tracking system.
Stephen> --with-system-malloc seems
> "Peter" == Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Well the version [of XEmacs] packaged for Debian on IA64
Peter> still does not work: Bug #149088 in the debian bug tracking
Peter> system.
--with-system-malloc seems to be necessary and sufficient on Red Hat
Linux systems
Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Andreas" == Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andreas> Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andreas> I have hacked XEmacs to re-assign all those function
> Andreas> pointers, good enough to get it running. But this hack is
> And
> "Andreas" == Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andreas> Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andreas> I have hacked XEmacs to re-assign all those function
Andreas> pointers, good enough to get it running. But this hack is
Andreas> too ugly, so I never bothered to send the patc
Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, but I need saved runtime-initialized function pointers. Do you
> have either a reference for how xemacs has handled this, or a contact
> person who might know?
I have hacked XEmacs to re-assign all those function pointers, good enough
to get it runn
Greetings, and thanks for your reply!
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > To sum up the previous discussion, the ia64 linux ABI apparently
> > offers no opportunity for ld.so to ensure that function descriptors
> > remain constant, even ove
16 matches
Mail list logo
