I have updated my patch from yesterday. This has been tested across a much more elaborate set of platforms. My guess is that xotcl has not been compiled against anything but gcc, or installed on non-linux systems.
This patch builds and installs on the following variants:
* Windows-x86 (cygwin/MSVC build) * Linux-x86 and x86_64 (gcc) * HP-UX 11 pa-risc (gcc and cc) * HP-UX 11 ia64 (cc) * AIX 4.3.3 (xlc) * Solaris 2.8 (gcc and cc)
test-core fails on HP-UX 11 pa-risc with:
FAILED: FAILED - UpLevel Test 2 Got: ::o Expected: ::s 0 g='::o' e='::s' make: *** [test-core] Error 255
and on some other platforms it can fail on exit (bad cleanup?), but this gets things a lot further.
I don't think the ALLOC checks are being done properly, as I said before - there is too much expectation that gcc-isms can be the default, which isn't correct, IMO.
Part of this patch is the for loop break fix in xotcl.c that I mentioned in my last message - that seems to have no effect on the test-core for the platforms.
It's probably best to just take this patch directly and call it xotcl-1.3.4, unless you want to further clean up based on my other suggestions (like ALLOC stuff).
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos
On Tuesday 30 November 2004 21:46, Jeff Hobbs wrote:
I have updated my patch from yesterday. This has been tested across a much more elaborate set of platforms. My guess is that xotcl has not been compiled against anything but gcc, or installed on non-linux systems.
unfortunately, we de not have a wide range of machines available. Our normal testing cycle starts with development under linux/gcc, then test under win with visual cc, for most releases zoran tests under sun with purify.
This patch builds and installs on the following variants:
- Windows-x86 (cygwin/MSVC build)
- Linux-x86 and x86_64 (gcc)
- HP-UX 11 pa-risc (gcc and cc)
- HP-UX 11 ia64 (cc)
- AIX 4.3.3 (xlc)
- Solaris 2.8 (gcc and cc)
great. many thanks.
test-core fails on HP-UX 11 pa-risc with:
FAILED: FAILED - UpLevel Test 2 Got: ::o Expected: ::s 0 g='::o' e='::s' make: *** [test-core] Error 255
was this with gcc or cc? Is it possible to get a guest account for the hpux machine?
and on some other platforms it can fail on exit (bad cleanup?), but this gets things a lot further.
I don't think the ALLOC checks are being done properly, as I said before - there is too much expectation that gcc-isms can be the default, which isn't correct, IMO.
i have changed the logic to use the gcc-ism only when gcc is used, and nobody explicitely stated to use alloca or malloc.
Part of this patch is the for loop break fix in xotcl.c that I mentioned in my last message - that seems to have no effect on the test-core for the platforms.
It's probably best to just take this patch directly and call it xotcl-1.3.4, unless you want to further clean up based on my other suggestions (like ALLOC stuff).
We will do so, -gustaf
unfortunately, we de not have a wide range of machines available. Our normal testing cycle starts with development under linux/gcc, then test under win with visual cc, for most releases zoran tests under sun with purify.
Understood. We are doing wide testing now in order to try and get this in ActiveTcl.
test-core fails on HP-UX 11 pa-risc with:
FAILED: FAILED - UpLevel Test 2 Got: ::o Expected: ::s 0 g='::o' e='::s' make: *** [test-core] Error 255
was this with gcc or cc? Is it possible to get a guest account for the hpux machine?
It didn't actually matter whether it was gcc or HP cc, both failed at the same spot. Unfortunately this machine is behind a firewall, so I couldn't give access regardless. I am still working on some other issues (just fixed the Windows doc building), so I haven't looked into this abnormality at this point. If you have an idea, I'll test it.
It's probably best to just take this patch directly and call it xotcl-1.3.4, unless you want to further clean up based on my other suggestions (like ALLOC stuff).
We will do so,
Actually, I have one more patch coming down the pipe - it only has more Makefile changes, but I will make it the same bulk-style patch as before. Actually, it changes makeDoc.xotcl as well to remove Windows-isms and be more error-sturdy.
Should be done with that shortly.
Jeff
was this with gcc or cc? Is it possible to get a guest account for the hpux machine?
It didn't actually matter whether it was gcc or HP cc, both failed at the same spot. Unfortunately this machine is behind a firewall, so I couldn't give access regardless. I am still working on some other issues (just fixed the Windows doc building), so I haven't looked into this abnormality at this point. If you have an idea, I'll test it.
hmm; it does not seem to get the right xotcl from from an uplevel command; try to change varFramePtr > top->currentFramePtr to varFramePtr != top->currentFramePtr in CallStackGetFrame().
It's probably best to just take this patch directly and call it xotcl-1.3.4, unless you want to further clean up based on my other suggestions (like ALLOC stuff).
We will do so,
Actually, I have one more patch coming down the pipe - it only has more Makefile changes, but I will make it the same bulk-style patch as before. Actually, it changes makeDoc.xotcl as well to remove Windows-isms and be more error-sturdy.
Should be done with that shortly.
jeff, many thanks for your efforts! integrating your full patch with my new changes will be no problem
-gustaf
Jeff
-
Gustaf Neumann -
Jeff Hobbs