On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 14:55, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> this is a follow up patch, which I think provides a better handling if
> either getcwd fails or is not availble - or if the pathname in argv[0]
> already is an absolute patch, in which case concatenating
> current-working-director
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 16:04, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> On 01/11/2012 02:08 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
>>
>> Checking for an absolute path is already done a few lines up. So if
>> you prefer the kind of approach that you have in your patch, IMHO a
>> more correct patch would be
>
>
> I had a quick c
Same patch with a minor update: I changed "cwd" from "char *" to "const
char *" as I spotted a compile time warning for
cwd = ".";
which was along the lines that by the assignment the const qualifier is
lost.
Too bad that we cannot enable -Werror for libgfortran.
On 01/11/2012 03:04 PM, To
On 01/11/2012 02:08 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
Checking for an absolute path is already done a few lines up. So if
you prefer the kind of approach that you have in your patch, IMHO a
more correct patch would be
I had a quick chat with Kai and decided to leave the lower part as is.
However, I r
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 14:55, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> this is a follow up patch, which I think provides a better handling if
> either getcwd fails or is not availble - or if the pathname in argv[0]
> already is an absolute patch, in which case concatenating
> current-working-director
Dear all,
this is a follow up patch, which I think provides a better handling if
either getcwd fails or is not availble - or if the pathname in argv[0]
already is an absolute patch, in which case concatenating
current-working-directory + '/' + argv[0] does not really make sense.
Build on x86
Hi Janne,
On 01/11/2012 08:37 AM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
Index: runtime/main.c
===
--- runtime/main.c (revision 183089)
+++ runtime/main.c (working copy)
@@ -116,8 +116,10 @@ store_exe_path (const char * argv0)
memset
Hi,
I committed the attached patch as obvious to trunk after the RM
considered it OK in the PR.
Index: runtime/main.c
===
--- runtime/main.c (revision 183089)
+++ runtime/main.c (working copy)
@@ -116,8 +116,10 @@ store_exe
