Hi Dann, Thanks for the speedy feedback -- I only uploaded this version a few hours ago! I am also CCing Diethelm, the upstream author, and hope to get this resolved quickly.
On 30 October 2006 at 18:23, dann frazier wrote: | Package: fseries | Version: 240.10068-1 | Severity: important | | Our automated buildd log filter[1] detected a problem that will cause | your package to segfault on architectures where the size of a pointer | is greater than the size of an integer, such as ia64 and amd64. | | This is often due to a missing function prototype definition. | | [1]http://people.debian.org/~dannf/check-implicit-pointer-functions | | ----- Forwarded message from Debian/IA64 non-US Build Daemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- | | Subject: Log for successful build of fseries_240.10068-1 (dist=unstable) | From: Debian/IA64 non-US Build Daemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 00:09:00 +0000 | To: undisclosed-recipients: ; | X-PMX-Version: 5.2.1.279297, Antispam-Engine: 2.4.0.264935, Antispam-Data: 2006.10.30.155433 | X-PerlMx-Spam: Gauge=XXXI, Probability=31%, Report='HASHBUSTER_BLOCK_V2 3.4, __CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __HASHBUSTER_BLOCK_V2_1 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __SANE_MSGID 0' | X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at ldl.fc.hp.com | X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on ldl.lart | X-Spam-Level: | X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=3.5 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,UNDISC_RECIPS | autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 | Debian-Buildd-Error: Yes | | Function `R_alloc' implicitly converted to pointer at 5A-ChaoticTimeSeries.c:72 Now, the code here is void d2(double *in_series, int *in_length, int *in_m, int *in_d, int *in_t, int *in_neps, double *in_epsM, double *in_epsm, double *out) { double tmpd, **hist; [...] hist = (double**) R_alloc(m, sizeof(double*)); ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ for(i=0; i<m; i++) { hist[i] = (double*) R_alloc(neps, sizeof(double)); ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ for(j = 0; j<neps; j++) output(i,j) = hist[i][j] = 0.0; } I don't immediately see why that would be wrong -- isn't that simply the old 'pointer-pointer to point' method of cramming 2d matrices into vectors of vectors? Are sure that this will land a defect under amd64 and ia64? Dirk -- Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something. -- Thomas A. Edison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
