Joshua Boyd <jdboyd@...> writes:
> I previously built 0.9.3 on the same platform using 0.8.18 and gcc 3.3,
> now I am trying to build 0.9.4 using 0.9.3 and gcc 4.0.1. Where the
> build fails is on the file sparc-arch.c, lines 89 and 90, with the
> errors illegal lvalue. The lines in question read:
> ((char *) *os_context_pc_addr(context)) = ((char *)*os_context_npc_addr(context));
> ((char *) *os_context_npc_addr(context)) += 4;
> Since the sbcl file in question is unchanged between the two versions,
> I'm wondering if this is a known GCC4 issue?
I believe this is a known sbcl-with-gcc4 issue (gcc4 is correct in
complaining about those lines). A patch which fixes the issue for you
would be welcome.
> Also, what is desired for contributing a binary package to the SBCL
> project for distribution. The sourceforge site seems to only have
> 0.8.18 for download still, and I'd like to contribute a newer build
> (either 0.9.3 or this one when I get the issues worked out). What is
> the proper testing for builds before distributing them, and would there
> be interest in solaris packages rather than just tarballs?
I can't comment on packages vs. tarballs, but I'm happy for now to
build sbcl binaries from time to time (though not necessarily every
month -- I don't believe that that's necessary, given that building
sbcl, even for users, should be straightforward.)
> Does lack of updates here mean that no one else is using this port anymore?
Coincidentally (and it has to be coincidence, given how long it takes
for my machine to build SBCL :-) I've just uploaded a binary of SBCL
for SPARC/SunOS. Not that I'm using it, but it still builds for me
when I don't change anything on the machine in question.