Re: headache on build repeatibility: octave vs BLODA ?

[Marco Atzeri <marco dot atzeri at gmail dot com>]

Am 30.01.2020 um 22:05 schrieb Brian Inglis:
> On 2020-01-29 06:46, Takashi Yano wrote:
> > Hi Marco,
> >
> > On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:19:11 +0100
> > Marco Atzeri wrote:
> > > As Octave uses gnulib, it is possible that the changes in MS are causing
> > > a different subset of gnulib to be used than before, may be exposing
> > > a latent bug or race.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately my old build tree was polluted by mistake, so I can
> > > not directly compare a good build tree versus a failing one.
> >
> > I found suspicious difference between the working build and the
> > not-working build.
> >
> > The not-working build has fflush.o, fseek.o and fseeko.o in
> > build/libgnu/.libs
> > directory, while the working build does not.
> >
> > Also, cygoctave-7.dll of not-working build exports rpl_fflush,
> > rpl_fseek and rpl_fseeko, while that of the working build does
> > not.
> >
> > As a test, I used following patch to forcibly remove the code
> > setting REPLACE_FSEEKO to 1 in configure script, and rebuilt
> > octave. This works without segmentation fault.
>
> For these to be considered missing or deficient such that they should be
> provided or replaced gnulib must consider Cygwin lacking support for ANSI C
> fflush https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/MODULES.html#ansic_enh_stdio
> and POSIX 2008 fseek and fseeko supporting pipes and 4GB in 32 bit mode
> https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/MODULES.html#posix_sup
> perhaps as a result of incorrect conclusions about Cygwin in autoreconf?

I was able to rebuild 5.1.0 successfully on a x86_64 cygwin1.dll
built from git source.
Nor flush or fseek gnulib modules were built.

During weekend I will replicate with i686.

Regards
Marco


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple