On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Bill Hart wrote:
>
> No issues with a Core 2 build.
>
> I'll now try MPIR 1.0 and see if the issue occurs with that version
> instead of trunk.
>
> Bill.
>
> 2009/4/10 Bill Hart :
>> No issues with trunk on the latest Cygwin. Now trying a Core 2 build.
>>
>> Is it
No issues with a Core 2 build.
I'll now try MPIR 1.0 and see if the issue occurs with that version
instead of trunk.
Bill.
2009/4/10 Bill Hart :
> No issues with trunk on the latest Cygwin. Now trying a Core 2 build.
>
> Is it possible we have fixed the issues that were reported on Cygwin32 in
No issues with trunk on the latest Cygwin. Now trying a Core 2 build.
Is it possible we have fixed the issues that were reported on Cygwin32 in trunk?
Bill.
2009/4/10 Bill Hart :
> I finally got MSYS/MinGW working on my machine. There were errors all
> the way through the MSYS installation proc
I finally got MSYS/MinGW working on my machine. There were errors all
the way through the MSYS installation procedure, but I could
eventually get it to install and it did build MPIR.
Both and ordinary build and a fat binary build work and pass make
check. Most of the yasm tests fail, but yasm its
I think I have realised that it is ok for us to distribute GPL code,
so long as it is not included as part of the library itself when
built. After all, some of the demos are GPL.
Bill.
2009/4/9 Jason Moxham :
>
>
> Because of the license issue , I deleted it , it was a very poor hack anyway ,
>
Because of the license issue , I deleted it , it was a very poor hack anyway ,
I can put it back if you want , there is a very small Makefile.am change
On Thursday 09 April 2009 09:40:55 Bill Hart wrote:
> Jason,
>
> for some reason the bench directory doesn't seem to have made it into
> trunk
On Apr 9, 9:37 am, Bill Hart wrote:
> Can you give me a link to the site. I think I am getting it from the
> wrong place.
Sorry for the daly Bill but I have been travelling since 9:30 this
morning and have only just got off the road.
I think I just followed the instrructions here:
http://www
That's really, really odd. Why does their new assembler not know how
to deal with relocations?
At least I can update my Cygwin and try to replicate the issue you are having.
Thanks for the information. Hopefully we'll get somewhere with it now.
Bill.
2009/4/9 Jeff Gilchrist :
>
> On Thu, Apr 9
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Bill Hart wrote:
> That's interesting. My Cygwin uses (gcc -v):
>
> gcc version 3.4.4 (cygming special, gdc 0.12, using dmd 0.125)
>
> It looks like it was installed November 2007, so about 18 months old.
> I've not done anything special to it, such as installing
That's interesting. My Cygwin uses (gcc -v):
gcc version 3.4.4 (cygming special, gdc 0.12, using dmd 0.125)
It looks like it was installed November 2007, so about 18 months old.
I've not done anything special to it, such as installing gcc version
4.
I may have installed development headers of s
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:14 AM, Bill Hart wrote:
> I'm going to downgrade the bug we have listed in trac for cygwin32
> from a blocker, as it only appears to affect old versions of Cygwin.
> I'm not totally sure we can do anything for such setups.
The cygwin I have that is experiencing this pro
Jason,
for some reason the bench directory doesn't seem to have made it into
trunk. Any chance you could merge it? I see it in multweeks. Is it
just a matter of copying the directory over or does the main makefile
and configure need some work?
Bill.
--~--~-~--~~~---~-
Can you give me a link to the site. I think I am getting it from the
wrong place.
I put msys on my system and there was no gcc. So I put mingw on, but
when I ran gcc it just said "no input files". It didn't matter what I
tried to compile, I got the same message.
I then found that I was supposed
On Apr 9, 9:30 am, Bill Hart wrote:
> Ah, indeed I didn't read the failure log correctly. It was mingw32.
>
> So I really have to get that going on my system somehow.
>
> Does anyone know where I can download a working version of Mingw32
> that is easy to install and has a working gcc for Vista
On Apr 9, 9:27 am, Bill Hart wrote:
> Oh, have I got this mixed up? I assumed it was ming64 that we had the
> --enable-fat issue. It was on Windows 2000 if I recall. Could it have
> been mingw32 on Windows 2000?
I am afraid I didn't get involved in this issue so I don't know the
answer.
B
Ah, indeed I didn't read the failure log correctly. It was mingw32.
So I really have to get that going on my system somehow.
Does anyone know where I can download a working version of Mingw32
that is easy to install and has a working gcc for Vista 32 bits?
Bill.
2009/4/9 Bill Hart :
> Oh, have
Oh, have I got this mixed up? I assumed it was ming64 that we had the
--enable-fat issue. It was on Windows 2000 if I recall. Could it have
been mingw32 on Windows 2000?
Bill.
2009/4/9 Cactus :
>
>
>
> On Apr 9, 9:14 am, Bill Hart wrote:
>> I fixed a bug in fat.c in the x86 directory (replace a
On Apr 9, 9:14 am, Bill Hart wrote:
> I fixed a bug in fat.c in the x86 directory (replace athlon with k8)
> and on cygwin32 MPIR builds and passes make check. The fat binary also
> builds and passes make check.
>
> I'm going to downgrade the bug we have listed in trac for cygwin32
> from a blo
I fixed a bug in fat.c in the x86 directory (replace athlon with k8)
and on cygwin32 MPIR builds and passes make check. The fat binary also
builds and passes make check.
I'm going to downgrade the bug we have listed in trac for cygwin32
from a blocker, as it only appears to affect old versions of
19 matches
Mail list logo
