[sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-12-10 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Alexander Dreyer wrote: > Dear Dave, >> From >> http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/cmp_stlport_libCstd.html >> I read, that one might have to build with -library=stlport4 . >> >> I'll try it out. FWIW, the HP C++ compiler for HP-UX has exactly the same issue as the Sun Studio compiler -

[sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-12-05 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Dr. David Kirkby wrote: > http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/cmp_stlport_libCstd.html > > says you can't mix the libCstd and libstlport libraries. However, they will > be > mixed if python is not built with the compiler option '-library=stlport4', > but > PolyBoRi is built with that o

[sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-12-04 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Alexander Dreyer wrote: > Dear Dave, >> From >> http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/cmp_stlport_libCstd.html >> I read, that one might have to build with -library=stlport4 . >> >> I'll try it out. > Ok, that was the right direction. I did some experiments with standalone > PolyBoRi, I had t

[sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-12-04 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Alexander Dreyer wrote: > Dear Dave, >> From >> http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/cmp_stlport_libCstd.html >> I read, that one might have to build with -library=stlport4 . >> >> I'll try it out. > Ok, that was the right direction. I did some experiments with standalone > PolyBoRi, I had t

[sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-12-04 Thread Alexander Dreyer
Dear Dave, > From > http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/cmp_stlport_libCstd.html > I read, that one might have to build with -library=stlport4 . > > I'll try it out. Ok, that was the right direction. I did some experiments with standalone PolyBoRi, I had to change the code at some places (

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-11-28 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Alexander Dreyer wrote: > Dear Dave, > I'll try to find time to have a look at it. But unfortunately, Sun, in > particular the Sun-Compiler, is out of the scope of the projects, I'm > working on. So I cannot promise to fix it in the next days. Meanwhile, > you can have a look, how to teach the Sun

[sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-11-28 Thread Alexander Dreyer
Dear Dave, > The previous issue observed in Sage with PolyBoRi picking up the wrong > compiler (Sun's C++ compiler instead of gcc) is resolved. PolyBoRi is > now using whatever CC and CXX are set too, which is good news. > > But PolyBoRi will not build with Sun's compiler. There seems to be a few

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-11-27 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Dr. David Kirkby wrote: > The Sun equivalent of -fPIC, is usually -KPIC, though I think that is > different > on 64-bit platforms. It is also different on other platforms too. Of course, any modern Sun is 64-bit. What I mean is that I believe the correct flag to produce position independent c

[sage-devel] Re: [Polybori-discuss] Portability issue - GNU specific options sent to non-GNU compiler

2009-11-27 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Alexander Dreyer wrote: > Dear Dave, Hi Alexander > thank you, for pointing out that this issue is not resolved in Sage. I > thought, these things were resolved, because we were discussing similar > issues within another thread. The previous issue observed in Sage with PolyBoRi picking up the wr