As reported in track ticket 377 (amongst other things), eet seems
to fail to build (on Debian).
# svn checkout FOO/eet
# cd eet
# ./autogen.sh
# make
[snip]
libtool: link: gcc -std=gnu99 -Wall -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe
-Wl,--as-needed -o .libs/eet eet-eet_main.o ../../src/lib/.libs/libeet.s
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:50:04 +1000 Simon Horman said:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
>>> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
Is the following appropriate?
--
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:02:19 +1000 David Seikel said:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:53:17 +1000 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
> wrote:
>
> > i've sen this game played before (using high order bits) and then it
> > com crashing down on peoples heads when suddenly those used bits
> > become relevan
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:53:17 +1000 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
wrote:
> i've sen this game played before (using high order bits) and then it
> com crashing down on peoples heads when suddenly those used bits
> become relevant.
Microsoft BASIC for the Amiga I'll bet. lol
signature.asc
Des
On Wednesday 09 September 2009 22:17:48 you wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 22:04:35 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
> > On Wednesday 09 September 2009 21:15:25 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > > On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha
> > > said:
> > >
> > > you won't like this but e_remote and e's
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 22:04:35 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
> On Wednesday 09 September 2009 21:15:25 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
> >
> > you won't like this but e_remote and e's ipc are scheduled for death
> > (removal). 1. we have a dbu api
On Wednesday 09 September 2009 21:15:25 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
>
> you won't like this but e_remote and e's ipc are scheduled for death
> (removal). 1. we have a dbu api already for e, 2. this includes the core
> set of ops needed, 3.
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:19:53 +1000 Simon Horman said:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:53:17AM +1000, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:52:39 -0300 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
> > said:
> >
> > you've already put my word in on this. i go the accounting way. 1. it is
> > consistent with
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:53:17AM +1000, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:52:39 -0300 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
> said:
>
> you've already put my word in on this. i go the accounting way. 1. it is
> consistent with eina_list. 2. can be extended beyond last and include count
> and
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
you won't like this but e_remote and e's ipc are scheduled for death
(removal). 1. we have a dbu api already for e, 2. this includes the core set of
ops needed, 3. it's expandable by modules. the maintenance of ipc_handlers is
painful. i w
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:54:01 +1000 Simon Horman said:
> > actually. alibin is wrong (sorry!) autogen's do get packaged. look at
> > existing efl. we put it in so if u get a tarball u CAN easily modify the
> > configure.ac, Makefile.am's etc. and re-generate the autofoo. the script
> > will be the
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:46:54AM +1000, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:50:04 +1000 Simon Horman said:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> > > On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> > > > Is the following appropriate?
> > > >
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:52:39 -0300 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
said:
you've already put my word in on this. i go the accounting way. 1. it is
consistent with eina_list. 2. can be extended beyond last and include count and
many other things. 3. doesn't change inlist struct size to be bigger (tho we
do
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:50:04 +1000 Simon Horman said:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> > On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> > > Is the following appropriate?
> > >
> > > --
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> > Is the following appropriate?
> >
> > -
> >
> > Subject: Add autogen.sh to dist tarball
> >
> >
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Enlightenment SVN wrote:
>>
>> Modified: trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h
>> ===
>> --- trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h 2009-09-09 10:44:25
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Ivan Briano wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Enlightenment SVN wrote:
Modified: trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h
===
--- trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inli
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Enlightenment SVN wrote:
Modified: trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h
===
--- trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h2009-09-09 10:44:25 UTC (rev
42365)
+++ trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h2
Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri schrieb:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> CFLAGS: -O3
>>> LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
>>>
>>> with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
>>> without, it is 142216
>>>
>>> is it nor
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Peter Wehrfritz wrote:
> Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri schrieb:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>>>
>>>
Hey,
CFLAGS: -O3
LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
with amalgamation,
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> CFLAGS: -O3
>> LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
>>
>> with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
>> without, it is 142216
>>
>> is it normal ?
>
> I mean, such a small difference in size
i'
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 08:52:39PM -0300, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
>- ultra-dirty hack to remove extra pointer. The hack bases on the
> fact that we just use ->last from the first node, that always have the
> ->prev == NULL. So we could have the first ->prev == ->last, but how
> to know
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
>> Is the following appropriate?
>>
>> -
>>
>> Subject: Add autogen.sh to dist tarball
>>
>> autogen.sh is used by the deb
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> CFLAGS: -O3
> LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
>
> with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
> without, it is 142216
>
> is it normal ?
I mean, such a small difference in size
Vincent
-
On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> Is the following appropriate?
>
> -
>
> Subject: Add autogen.sh to dist tarball
>
> autogen.sh is used by the debian packaging so it seems
> appropriate to include
Hey,
CFLAGS: -O3
LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
without, it is 142216
is it normal ?
Vincent
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Sim
26 matches
Mail list logo
