On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:02:48PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:47:08AM -0400, Stuart Cassoff wrote:
> > No interest?
> 
> not really, but i'll try to run it through a bulk build.
> you should see the guard_local thingy with matthew@, but maybe the
> machine where you tested wasnt enough up  to date.

I've also experienced the __guard_local failures on an up2date ad64,
some python regress tests fail:

/usr/local/bin/python2.7:/usr/obj/ports/swig-2.0.8/swig-2.0.8/Examples/python/constants/_example.so:undefined
 symbol '__guard_local'

The update itself only broke zarafa-webaccess:

icalmapi_wrap.cxx:3678: error: 'SWIG_From_long' was not declared in this scope

So see that with zarafa maintainers. that'd also be good to have it
tested on ppc & sparc64.

Landry

> > On 10/03/12 06:34, Stuart Cassoff wrote:
> > > On 09/08/12 19:58, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
> > >> On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 01:01:37AM +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 06:28:12PM -0400, Stuart Cassoff wrote:
> > >>>> Now that you're in there, why not bring swig up to the latest?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I posted a diff for a swig-wip a while back and looking at it now,
> > >>>> it doesn't seem too hard to upgrade. I do remember being confused
> > >>>> about boost and that maybe swig will find and use things if
> > >>>> installed, even if --without-things is used.
> > >>>
> > >>> I guessed that exists a good reason for the outdated port, so I only
> > >>> added the line with the option.
> > >>>
> > >>> I've been reading the changes of the last four years and working in
> > >>> the update this afternoon. The update isn't so easy, 68 packages
> > >>> depends of swig and I've seen at least 4 patches related to swig.
> > >>>
> > >>> Also I'm explicitely disabling the most of the languages (except the
> > >>> enabled in 1.3.6). I don't like the magic of "configure" for this
> > >>> package. If someone wants enable some language, he or she needs add
> > >>> the necessary stuff to the Makefile (modules, *_depends, etc). I may
> > >>> be wrong, but I think that dpb will generate different packages with
> > >>> each bulk build if we rely on the magic of "configure", eg: if dpb is
> > >>> compiling swig and packageY (that depends of languageZ) at the same
> > >>> time, swig will enable the support for languageZ because the package
> > >>> is installed in the build machine.
> > >>>
> > >>> I can't do a bulk build for to test the packages that depends of swig,
> > >>> but I'll review the makefiles for to see the languages necessary. I'll
> > >>> send you the patch the next week :)
> > >>
> > >> I was a bit wrong. The dependencies are only necessary for the tests and
> > >> examples, not for compile the package or to use this from other
> > >> languages.
> > >>
> > >> Don't blame me, I haven't used swig before of today :)
> > >>
> > > 
> > > Latest diff, based on your work and mine.
> > > Swig now seems to need boost. Objections/Suggestions?
> > > Some tests fail because of '__guard_local'.
> > > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/gnu/gcc/gcc/targhooks.c rev 1.3
> > > I have no idea what to do about that.
> > > Tested on amd64 and with a Tcl extension that wraps OpenGL (a big wrap).
> > > Not tested in a bulk or with other extensions.
> > > 
> > > Stu
> > 

Reply via email to