Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-03-01 Thread John Wolfe
Hi Ralf, Tim Here I am playing catch up again. At first look at the patch I have one concern and that may be what is contributing to the failures later reported in this thread. - In the patch, I think the "$CC -r" should be "$LD -r" Using the C++ compiler command to do the linking does

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-28 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
[ let's drop libtool@ from replies ] * Tim Rice wrote on Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 07:37:47PM CET: > On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > Anyway, I think the patch below should implement this (and add John to > > THANKS). Can you try it? Thanks. > > The test still fails although the pa

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-28 Thread Tim Rice
Hi Ralf, On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: [snip] > Is this an optimization only, or a necessary thing? IOW, if I omit > libfoo-1.0 in this "CC -Tprelink_objects" line, would that only > pessimize link time, or could it affect the link result? I'll let John answer this > Anyway, I t

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-28 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello John, Tim, * John Wolfe wrote on Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 07:38:41PM CET: > Happy to contribute where I can. Sorry to not get back to you sooner: > I actually spent an evening away from the computer. No problem at all of course. [ snip explanations ] > All that is probably more than you want

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-28 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Tim, * Tim Rice wrote on Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 01:50:27AM CET: > On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > : * Tim Rice wrote on Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:47:49PM CET: > : > > : > Sure, attched as x.tst-without-patch & x.tst-with-patch > : > I've also attached the curent patch I'm using as

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-26 Thread John Wolfe
Feb 23, 2009 at 10:47:49PM CET: : > On Sat, 21 Feb 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: : > > * Tim Rice wrote on Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 09:29:40PM CET: : > > > : > > > I'm trying to understand the cmdline_wrap.at test. : > > > I've added this patch to fix

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-25 Thread Tim Rice
'm trying to understand the cmdline_wrap.at test. : > > > I've added this patch to fix the 2 template tests that were failing : > > > on UnixWare 7.1.4 : > > : > > Can you post the verbose output of the test both without and with the : > > patch? Thanks. : &

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-24 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Tim, * Tim Rice wrote on Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:47:49PM CET: > On Sat, 21 Feb 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Tim Rice wrote on Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 09:29:40PM CET: > > > > > > I'm trying to understand the cmdline_wrap.at test. > > > I've add

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-23 Thread Tim Rice
Hi Ralf, On Sat, 21 Feb 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hi Tim, > > * Tim Rice wrote on Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 09:29:40PM CET: > > > > I'm trying to understand the cmdline_wrap.at test. > > I've added this patch to fix the 2 template tests that were failing &g

Re: cmdline_wrap.at

2009-02-21 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Tim, * Tim Rice wrote on Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 09:29:40PM CET: > > I'm trying to understand the cmdline_wrap.at test. > I've added this patch to fix the 2 template tests that were failing > on UnixWare 7.1.4 Can you post the verbose output of the test both without and w