On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:42:05AM -0500, Hubert Chathi wrote:
>
> Based on this, it's probably best to just stick with ffcall for now,
> until we really need to switch to libffi (if we ever need to).
Sounds reasonable, but how do you plan to resolve the current issue? I
see two ways:
1) Disa
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:33:08 +0200, Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I don't have an opinion, as I'm not familiar with both. GNUstep
> Base's configure.ac prefers ffcall, but that doesn't indicate much, I
> guess.
> While searching for more information about this issue, I found these
>
On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 12:17:47PM -0500, Hubert Chathi wrote:
> So I'm thinking of switching GNUstep from ffcall to libffi (which is
> part of the GCC sources, so I'm guessing would be better maintained than
> ffcall, which hasn't been updated for a long time). What does everyone
> think about th
On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:32:51 +0200, Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Unfortunately the package failed to build on arm, which blocks the
> whole GNUstep transition:
> [...]
> checking FFI library usage... ffcall
> checking if ffcall trampolines work... no
> none
>
> You have ffcall, but i
Source: gnustep-base
Version: 1.14.0-2
Severity: serious
Unfortunately the package failed to build on arm, which blocks the
whole GNUstep transition:
[...]
checking FFI library usage... ffcall
checking if ffcall trampolines work... no
none
You have ffcall, but it does not work properly.
[...]
co
5 matches
Mail list logo
