FWIW, my MacBook has nothing special installed. The "About This Mac" dialog box says "Mac OS X Version 10.4.8. 2GHz Intel Core Duo". I searched through the Makefile that configure generated and there was no sign of a -static flag anywhere. "gcc -v" says version 4.0.1, (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5250). I'm really curious to know why it works and nobody elses does.
as am i :-/ couple of things of note -- both you & pkishor (next post) are on IntelMacs. _all_ of my Macs are G4/G5 boxes. if not that, then, i _suspect_ (no evidence yet ...) that the difference may well be in the dev environment. mine is, % gcc -v Using built-in specs. Target: powerpc-apple-darwin8 Configured with: /private/var/tmp/gcc/gcc-5367.obj~1/src/configure --disable-checking -enable-werror --prefix=/usr --mandir=/share/man --enable-languages=c,objc,c++,obj-c++ --program-transform-name=/^[cg][^.-]*$/s/$/-4.0/ --with-gxx-include-dir=/include/c++/4.0.0 --with-slibdir=/usr/lib --build=powerpc-apple-darwin8 --host=powerpc-apple-darwin8 --target=powerpc-apple-darwin8 Thread model: posix gcc version 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367) % automake --version automake (GNU automake) 1.10 % autoconf --version autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.61 % sed --version GNU sed version 4.1.5 % gawk --version GNU Awk 3.1.5 % glibtool --version ltmain.sh (GNU libtool) 1.5.22 (1.1220.2.365 2005/12/18 22:14:06) all of which are newer -- some much! -- thatn Apple's 'stock' versions; in particular, note my glibtool @ v1.5.22. the ltmain.sh _bundled_ with sqlite388 is v1.5.2, iirc. also, my are _your_ dev targets set as, % env | grep -i target MACOSX_DEVELOPMENT_TARGET=10.4 MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.4 % ?
Call me cranky if you want.
leaning in that direction ;-)
That is the privilege of people who have seen as much water under the bridge as I have.
heh. how 'bout we can compare stacks of keypunch cards at another time ...
This is not an important patch and does not close any real bug that I can see. It probably just makes some gee-whiz syntax checker tool stop complaining. Whatever...
i'm certainly making no judgement as to relative value. my only goal is to end up with a clean build, and well-behaved test suite, so as to be able to label the result as 'high(er) confidence', and pass all on to staff that actaully _deserve_ to be paid for their efforts! if you're interested in sleuthing a bit -- and determining if there's something that needs to be fixed, correct version dependencies, etc etc -- i'm happy to play guinea-pig. otherwise, i'll simply focus on workarounds for the problem, and the remoaining bug(lets) i'm seeing ... thanks! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
