From: Terje B. <li...@po...> - 2005-11-29 03:07:25
|
OpenSP 1.5.2pre1, the first prerelease of OpenSP 1.5.2, has been released! OpenSP 1.5.2 is a bug fix and maintenance release. <http://sf.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2115&package_id=2869&release_id= 374436> Changes in OpenSP 1.5.2pre1 * Support for version 4.0 of the GNU C++ compiler. * Added doc building and config option. * Updated local gettext. * Added config option to turn off DTDDECL support. * Update 'de' and 'fr' translations; add new 'tr' translation. * Add more tests. The build has been tested on Fedora Core Rawhide and Mac OS X 10.4.2, and Win32 binaries are expected to show up in the not too distant future. Other than the internal test suite, this release has not been extensively tested so you should expect there to be outstanding issues. Please report these in the Bug Tracker on SF.net: <http://sf.net/tracker/?func=add&group_id=2115&atid=102115> Please _do_ log in before reporting a bug or we'll have trouble following up on your report. If you do not have a SF.net account you can report problems by email to the mailinglist. While all feedback would be valuable, we are in particular looking for build reports (both success and fail) on as many platforms as possible and with as many different compilers as possible. -- I'm [less] than thrilled by the [VM situation]; all sides of it. I [think] we need a [fork] in that area so that you guys would stop stepping on each others' toes. I'm taking no part in your merry 5-way clusterfuck -- sort that mess out between yourselves. -- Alexander Viro on lkml |
From: Terje B. <li...@po...> - 2005-12-01 10:19:41
|
Terje Bless <li...@po...> wrote: >OpenSP 1.5.2pre1, the first prerelease of OpenSP 1.5.2, has been release= d! And a few quick notes on that=E2=80=A6 It's tagged in CVS as =E2=80=9Copensp-1_5_2pre1-release=E2=80=9D and modu= lo feedback that it has issues this should be more or less what gets released as 1.5.2. The vario= us changes by Neil, Bj=C3=B6rn, and Karl recently seems to have fixed all th= e major issues that I'm aware of (not that that's any kind of guarantee). I intend to push out a 1.5.2 final release fairly quickly unless someone = pipes up with a veto or significant =E2=80=9C-1=E2=80=9D comments. Yes, this is= an arbitrary and unilateral decision. No, I have no qualms whatsoever about this. :-) ( Feel free to yell at me if I you feel the need though! ) Once 1.5.2 goes out I'm thinking I'll take a shot at merging the 1.5 bran= ch onto HEAD. Not sure what state HEAD is actually in ATM, but I think it's mostl= y Javier's new feature checkins so that should be fine. Not really sure whether there is a 1.5.3 or 1.6.0 in the near future. One open issue in 1.5.2pre1 is that I had to disable building of the PS a= nd PDF versions of the releasenotes (.html is till there). This is mostly becaus= e it interacted badly with what may be a borked DocBook toolchain on my devel = box (Neil has fixed everything else so I think it's my box that's borked). De= pending on various factors I may end up removing the PS and PDF versions complete= ly for the final release (chime in if you have an opinion on this; either way!). Also, for this release, please do at least download and try to build the tarball. There have been quite significant changes to the build system so build/fail reports (with: platform, version, GCC version, whatver else se= ems relevant) would be very usefull. If you have time for nothing else, please try to at least find the time t= o do a build and report back pass/fail status! I'm mercilessly nagging on various hapless victi^W^Wfolk to get us Win32 binaries and to get the package in Fedora Core (and by extension, RHEL) u= pdated to 1.5.2 for their next releases. Can I hope someone will do the same for Debian? How about Fink/Darwinports for Mac OS X? Anyone involved in those? Any other platforms/distros we could/should target? --=20 =E2=80=9CHath no man's dagger here a point for me?=E2=80=9D - Leonato, = Governor of Messina. See Project Gutenberg <URL:http://promo.net/pg/> for m= ore. |
From: Karl E. <ke...@su...> - 2005-12-01 15:16:29
|
Terje Bless <li...@po...> writes: > Terje Bless <li...@po...> wrote: > >>OpenSP 1.5.2pre1, the first prerelease of OpenSP 1.5.2, has been >>released! Thanks for preparing a release! Finding xml.dcl on SUSE Linux is a chicken-and-egg-problem, because we install it as part of the opensp package. I guess it would not hurt to add :./pubtext to the search path. With the appended patch OpenSP builds on SUSE Linux 10.0 (x86) and "make check SHOWSTOPPERS=". Now running "make distcheck SHOWSTOPPERS="... Index: configure.in =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/openjade/sp/configure.in,v retrieving revision 1.29.2.39 diff -w -u -r1.29.2.39 configure.in --- configure.in 29 Nov 2005 16:23:20 -0000 1.29.2.39 +++ configure.in 1 Dec 2005 15:07:58 -0000 @@ -537,7 +537,8 @@ AC_MSG_ERROR( [could not find pdfjadetex; set PDFJADETEX or consider --disable-doc-build]) fi - AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, [/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration]) + AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, +[/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration:./pubtext]) if test -z "$XMLDCL" then AC_MSG_ERROR( -- Karl Eichwalder R&D / Documentation SUSE Linux Products GmbH Key fingerprint = B2A3 AF2F CFC8 40B1 67EA 475A 5903 A21B 06EB 882E |
From: Terje B. <li...@po...> - 2005-12-01 17:13:10
|
Karl Eichwalder <ke...@su...> wrote: >Finding xml.dcl on SUSE Linux is a chicken-and-egg-problem, because we >install it as part of the opensp package. I guess it would not hurt to >add :./pubtext to the search path. Hmmm. Since we have an internal copy of xml.dcl, perhaps we should use it unconditionally? Then again, since we no longer build PDF and PS versions, perhaps we don'= t strictly need it for anything so the check can be dropped? --=20 =E2=80=9CFrailty, thy name is woman!=E2=80=9D - Hamlet= , Prince of Denmark. See Project Gutenberg <URL:http://promo.net/pg/> for m= ore. |
From: Karl E. <ke...@su...> - 2005-12-02 10:43:23
Attachments:
OpenSP-1.5.1-gcc41.patch
|
Terje Bless <li...@po...> writes: > Since we have an internal copy of xml.dcl, perhaps we should use it > unconditionally? Yes, agreed. > Then again, since we no longer build PDF and PS versions, perhaps we don't > strictly need it for anything so the check can be dropped? It might be the best solution to make "--disable-doc-build" a default configuration switch. Then it builds mostly builds on all SUSE Linux platforms (i386, ia64, ppc, ppc64, s390/s390x, x86_64); only a minor patch is required to make it compile with the gcc 4.1 branch. I also updated automake and libtool files, though. |
From: Terje B. <li...@po...> - 2005-12-05 10:02:10
|
Karl Eichwalder <ke...@su...> wrote: >only a minor patch is required to make it compile with the gcc 4.1 branc= h. > >- InternalInputSource *InternalInputSource::asInternalInputSource(); >+ InternalInputSource *asInternalInputSource(); Is this GCC4.1 specific? Or should we =E2=80=94 you've just volunteered t= o do this :-) =E2=80=94 just check this in? What distros are shipping GCC 4.1 allready? It seems early still consider= ing how, ah, fresh GCC 4.1 is. --=20 =E2=80=9CImagine a 40-pound ferret with a personality-defect who has been= raised on a diet of anabolic steroids and weapons-grade PCP; and you have just said something unbelievably rude about his mother. Now you have to get him out of the trap=E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D -- Tanuk= i on Wolverines |
From: Karl E. <ke...@gn...> - 2005-12-06 07:18:58
|
Terje Bless <li...@po...> writes: > Is this GCC4.1 specific? Or should we =E2=80=94 you've just volunteered t= o do > this :-) =E2=80=94 just check this in? > > What distros are shipping GCC 4.1 allready? It seems early still consider= ing > how, ah, fresh GCC 4.1 is. Yes ;) I received this patch by one of our c++/gcc guru's. If nobody objects, I'll check it in. --=20 http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) Key fingerprint =3D F138 B28F B7ED E0AC 1AB4 AA7F C90A 35C3 E9D0 5D1C |
From: Karl E. <ke...@su...> - 2005-12-07 15:16:30
|
Karl Eichwalder <ke...@gn...> writes: > Yes ;) I received this patch by one of our c++/gcc guru's. If nobody > objects, I'll check it in. It's in. Please test. -- Karl Eichwalder R&D / Documentation SUSE Linux Products GmbH Key fingerprint = B2A3 AF2F CFC8 40B1 67EA 475A 5903 A21B 06EB 882E |
From: Neil R. <ne...@oc...> - 2005-12-04 17:14:54
|
I think you should just fix your local toolchain instead of disabling PDF and PS building for everyone. I had no problem building these while I was working with the CVS version. I even made some modifications to make sure this would all work. I just checked that reenabling it in the pre1 tarball still works. On Dec 1, Terje Bless (li...@po...) wrote: > Karl Eichwalder <ke...@su...> wrote: > > >Finding xml.dcl on SUSE Linux is a chicken-and-egg-problem, because we > >install it as part of the opensp package. I guess it would not hurt to > >add :./pubtext to the search path. > > Hmmm. > > Since we have an internal copy of xml.dcl, perhaps we should use it > unconditionally? > > Then again, since we no longer build PDF and PS versions, perhaps we don'= > t > strictly need it for anything so the check can be dropped? > > --=20 > =E2=80=9CFrailty, thy name is woman!=E2=80=9D - Hamlet= > , Prince of Denmark. > See Project Gutenberg <URL:http://promo.net/pg/> for m= > ore. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files > for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes > searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click > _______________________________________________ > OpenJade-devel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjade-devel -- Neil Roeth |
From: Neil R. <ne...@oc...> - 2005-12-05 02:35:49
|
On Dec 2, Karl Eichwalder (ke...@su...) wrote: > Terje Bless <li...@po...> writes: > > > Since we have an internal copy of xml.dcl, perhaps we should use it > > unconditionally? > > Yes, agreed. > > > Then again, since we no longer build PDF and PS versions, perhaps we don't > > strictly need it for anything so the check can be dropped? > > It might be the best solution to make "--disable-doc-build" a default > configuration switch. Then it builds mostly builds on all SUSE Linux > platforms (i386, ia64, ppc, ppc64, s390/s390x, x86_64); only a minor > patch is required to make it compile with the gcc 4.1 branch. I also > updated automake and libtool files, though. What's the consensus on this? When I added that option, I defaulted it such that it matched the prior behavior. Also, I thought that if someone just attempted to build the package and it failed, they'd have to explicitly turn doc building off, so they'd know what they were missing. If we make it the default not to build the docs, then, unless they happened to execute "configure --help", they would never know. -- Neil Roeth |
From: Karl E. <ke...@su...> - 2005-12-05 07:03:17
|
Neil Roeth <ne...@oc...> writes: > What's the consensus on this? The GNU way is to deliver documentation pre-built that depend on external tools (Info files). For me it would be okay to add HTML to the tar.bz2 file and for the rest (PS. PDF) let's provide make targets that the user has to call explicitely. We can also check for tools required to build PS or PDF, but in case something is missing on the build system, print a warning and continue with "./configure". -- | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) |
From: Neil R. <ne...@oc...> - 2005-12-11 20:02:45
|
On Dec 5, Karl Eichwalder (ke...@su...) wrote: > Neil Roeth <ne...@oc...> writes: > > > What's the consensus on this? > > The GNU way is to deliver documentation pre-built that depend on > external tools (Info files). For me it would be okay to add HTML to the > tar.bz2 file and for the rest (PS. PDF) let's provide make targets that > the user has to call explicitely. We can also check for tools required > to build PS or PDF, but in case something is missing on the build > system, print a warning and continue with "./configure". I set up configure so that building HTML and man pages is the default. There are two other options, no docs and the full set of docs (PDF and PS in addition to HTML and man pages). -- Neil Roeth |
From: olivier T. <ot...@zo...> - 2005-12-01 15:17:20
|
Hi Terje, All, On 1 Dec 2005, at 05:19, Terje Bless wrote: >> OpenSP 1.5.2pre1, the first prerelease of OpenSP 1.5.2, has been >> released! Congrats! > Also, for this release, please do at least download and try to > build the > tarball. There have been quite significant changes to the build > system so > build/fail reports (with: platform, version, GCC version, whatver > else seems > relevant) would be very usefull. ** System 1: debian GNU/Linux with gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13) Builds - with repeated warnings about: ../include/Owner.cxx: In destructor `OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': ../include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' Trie.h:22: instantiated from here ../include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: ../include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' ../include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class- specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. but make check fails a bunch of tests: qa:~/OpenSP-1.5.2pre1# make check | grep -i fail /root/OpenSP-1.5.2pre1/nsgmls/.libs/lt-onsgmls:E: error reading "./ cat-2/" (Is a directory) FAIL: catalog-2 /root/OpenSP-1.5.2pre1/nsgmls/.libs/lt-onsgmls:af-7.sgml:3:1:E: value of attribute "TYPE" cannot be "A"; must be one of "ZZZ", "YYY" FAIL: af-7 /root/OpenSP-1.5.2pre1/nsgmls/.libs/lt-onsgmls:af-8.sgml:3:1:E: value of attribute "ROLE" cannot be "A"; must be one of "ZZZ", "YYY" FAIL: af-8 FAIL: af-9 FAIL: af-10 FAIL: af-11 6 of 23 tests failed make[3]: *** [check-TESTS] Error 1 make[2]: *** [check-am] Error 2 make[1]: *** [check-recursive] Error 1 make: *** [check] Error 2 ** System 2: macOS X 10.4 Darwin Kernel Version 8.3.0, gcc version 4.0.0 20041026 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 4061) configure fails unless used with --disable-doc-build (no xmlto on the mac, could use xsltproc instead?) Builds smoothly, fails a few tests though: % make check | grep -i fail /Users/ot/Sites/cvs/public/OpenSP-1.5.2pre1/nsgmls/.libs/onsgmls:E: error reading "./cat-2/" (Is a directory) FAIL: catalog-2 /Users/ot/Sites/cvs/public/OpenSP-1.5.2pre1/nsgmls/.libs/ onsgmls:af-7.sgml:3:1:E: value of attribute "TYPE" cannot be "A"; must be one of "ZZZ", "YYY" FAIL: af-7 /Users/ot/Sites/cvs/public/OpenSP-1.5.2pre1/nsgmls/.libs/ onsgmls:af-8.sgml:3:1:E: value of attribute "ROLE" cannot be "A"; must be one of "ZZZ", "YYY" FAIL: af-8 FAIL: af-9 FAIL: af-10 FAIL: af-11 6 of 23 tests failed make[3]: *** [check-TESTS] Error 1 make[2]: *** [check-am] Error 2 make[1]: *** [check-recursive] Error 1 make: *** [check] Error 2 I can send in more info if necessary. By the way, I suggest that 'make check' also works as 'make test', which in my little world at least is more familiar. HTH, -- olivier |
From: Terje B. <li...@po...> - 2005-12-01 17:10:10
|
olivier Thereaux <ot...@zo...> wrote: >** System 1: debian GNU/Linux with gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13= ) > >Builds - with repeated warnings about: [=E2=80=A6] Hmm. I wonder if Neil might want to take a look at these. They sound like= they /may/ be related to the spate of fixes he provided for GCC4 warnings. >but make check fails a bunch of tests: 6 of 23 tests should fail; they're instances where OpenSP behaves incorre= ctly (defined here as =C2=ABdifferent from jjc's nsgmls=C2=BB IIRC). If you do= =E2=80=9Cmake check SHOWSTOPPERS=3D=E2=80=9D it should pass all tests (excludes the known bro= ken tests). >** System 2: macOS X 10.4 Darwin Kernel Version 8.3.0, gcc version 4.0.0 > 20041026 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 4061) > >configure fails unless used with --disable-doc-build (no xmlto on the >mac, could use xsltproc instead?) Hmm. I wonder if we could make this the default on Mac OS X=E2=80=A6 In general we need to do something about the docs. The current setup crea= tes quite a few requirements for building that would be solved by distributin= g pre-made docs. Perhaps add a local hook for =E2=80=9Cmake dist=E2=80=9D (and =E2=80=9Cma= ke dist-zip=E2=80=9D) that builds the docs so they're already in the release tarballs? That way only building f= rom CVS will require a complete docbook toolchain and the various other oddities. >Builds smoothly, fails a few tests though: See above. >I can send in more info if necessary. Thanks for testing this Olivier! >By the way, I suggest that 'make check' also works as 'make test', which >in my little world at least is more familiar. Actually, I think =E2=80=9Cmake test=E2=80=9D is the relative newcomer =E2= =80=94 brought in with Perl =E2=80=94 and =E2=80=9Cmake check=E2=80=9D the original from the GNU project. But p= erhaps it might be worth adding an alias for it; more testing can only be a good thing. --=20 =E2=80=9CSee... *That* is the problem... Scotch is for sipping, relaxing,= and deep thoughts... Jack is what you drink when you need to work through the pai= n.=E2=80=9D -- John C. We= lch |
From: Karl E. <ke...@su...> - 2005-12-01 20:21:41
|
Terje Bless <li...@po...> writes: > 6 of 23 tests should fail; they're instances where OpenSP behaves incorre= ctly > (defined here as =C2=ABdifferent from jjc's nsgmls=C2=BB IIRC). Yes, but it is more than this. jjc's implementation work according to the standards and as explained in David Megginson, 'Structuring XML Documents' (1998), a very nice book about XML and SGML ("Covers XML and full SGML"). --=20 | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) |
From: Terje B. <li...@po...> - 2005-12-05 09:57:12
|
Karl Eichwalder <ke...@su...> wrote: >Terje Bless <li...@po...> writes: > >>6 of 23 tests should fail; they're instances where OpenSP behaves >>incorrectly (defined here as =C3=82=C2=ABdifferent from jjc's nsgmls=C3= =82=C2=BB IIRC). > >Yes, but it is more than this. jjc's implementation work according to >the standards and as explained in David Megginson, 'Structuring XML >Documents' (1998), a very nice book about XML and SGML ("Covers XML and >full SGML"). Sure. I didn't mean to imply that they weren't real bugs. It's just that = I'd need a weekend or so of reading to even understand what the markup in que= stion is supposed to do =E2=80=94 not to mention how it's failing =E2=80=94 so = the simple test for bug-ness that even I can grasp is that it's different from jjc's version.= :-) BTW, do I recall you saying that these tests actually started failing som= ewhere along the 1.5 branch of OpenSP (or would have, rather, if they'd been the= re)? I recall seeing checkins in CVS touching the ArcForm code. Anyone incline= d to have a look at this =E2=80=94 and I suspect if you grok code you don't ne= cessarily need to grok ArcForm to be able to work on this! =E2=80=94 might want to begin= by having a look at that. Some of it may boil down to a =E2=80=9CUse *this instead of= *that=E2=80=9D (judging by what little I understand of tests/af-7). Both the SGML and C++ skillz needed for this are beyond me I'm afraid. :-= ( Also, Karl, while digging around the tests =E2=80=94 particularly the one= s that are failing =E2=80=94 I found myself wishing for a lot more descriptive text = for each test case. I found myself spending a lot more time on finding out what the tes= t was actually testing than looking at why it was failing. So the next time you= 're digging around in the tests/ directory, I'd appreciate it if you could ad= d more descriptive text to each test case for the benefit of the dunces like me.= Only where appropriate, of course. --=20 =C2=ABTerje, you are a sick and twisted individual, and I think I speak for all of us when I say, =E2=80=9CThank you!=E2=80=9D=C2= =BB -- John Gruber <gr...@ba...> |
From: Neil R. <ne...@oc...> - 2005-12-05 02:11:48
|
On Dec 1, Terje Bless (li...@po...) wrote: > olivier Thereaux <ot...@zo...> wrote: > > >** System 1: debian GNU/Linux with gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13= > ) > > > >Builds - with repeated warnings about: [=E2=80=A6] > > Hmm. I wonder if Neil might want to take a look at these. They sound like= > they > /may/ be related to the spate of fixes he provided for GCC4 warnings. Actually, these warnings have occurred for a while, they disappear when you use g++ 4.0 instead of g++ 3.3. I think they're harmless. -- Neil Roeth |
From: olivier T. <ot...@zo...> - 2005-12-01 19:04:57
|
On 1 Dec 2005, at 10:17, olivier Thereaux wrote: > ** System 1: debian GNU/Linux with gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian > 1:3.3.5-13) Apologies for the scattered report. I noticed that on the system 1 above, all builds and works ok locally, however, after make install'ing it, it fails to run, not finding libosp.so.5: [[ /usr/local/bin/onsgmls: error while loading shared libraries: libosp.so.5: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory ]] A look at the output of make install shows that the lib has indeed been installed in /usr/local/lib [[ /usr/bin/install -c .libs/libosp.so.5.0.0 /usr/local/lib/libosp.so.5.0.0 (cd /usr/local/lib && rm -f libosp.so.5 && ln -s libosp.so.5.0.0 libosp.so.5) ]] And, surely enough: [[ export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib; /usr/local/bin/onsgmls -v ]] works just fine. It appears that /usr/local/lib is not commonly in LD_LIBRARY_PATH on debian. I assume whoever (Neil?) will make the deb package will take care of that properly and install the lib in /usr/lib (which is the case with the current .deb), but it might be worth looking onto it for the tarball installing, or documenting it? HTH, -- olivier |
From: Neil R. <ne...@oc...> - 2005-12-05 02:19:30
|
On Dec 1, olivier Thereaux (ot...@zo...) wrote: > > On 1 Dec 2005, at 10:17, olivier Thereaux wrote: > > ** System 1: debian GNU/Linux with gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian > > 1:3.3.5-13) > > Apologies for the scattered report. > > I noticed that on the system 1 above, all builds and works ok > locally, however, after make install'ing it, it fails to run, not > finding libosp.so.5: > [[ > /usr/local/bin/onsgmls: error while loading shared libraries: > libosp.so.5: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory > ]] > > A look at the output of make install shows that the lib has indeed > been installed in /usr/local/lib > [[ > /usr/bin/install -c .libs/libosp.so.5.0.0 /usr/local/lib/libosp.so.5.0.0 > (cd /usr/local/lib && rm -f libosp.so.5 && ln -s libosp.so.5.0.0 > libosp.so.5) > ]] > > And, surely enough: > [[ > export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib; /usr/local/bin/onsgmls -v > ]] > works just fine. > > It appears that /usr/local/lib is not commonly in LD_LIBRARY_PATH on > debian. I assume whoever (Neil?) will make the deb package will take > care of that properly and install the lib in /usr/lib (which is the > case with the current .deb), but it might be worth looking onto it > for the tarball installing, or documenting it? The Debian package will indeed install into /usr/lib, which is in searched by default. Whether to look in /usr/local/lib is left to the sys admin on Debian systems, i.e., if you look at the man page for ld(1) it specifies the search algorithm, mentioning LD_LIBRARY_PATH and the default directories /lib and /usr/lib, but not /usr/local/lib. However, it does mention that it looks in /etc/ld.so.conf, so if you add /usr/local/lib to that file, it will also be searched. -- Neil Roeth |
From: Terje B. <li...@po...> - 2005-12-05 09:44:37
|
olivier Thereaux <ot...@zo...> wrote: >It appears that /usr/local/lib is not commonly in LD_LIBRARY_PATH on >debian. I assume whoever (Neil?) will make the deb package will take >care of that properly and install the lib in /usr/lib (which is the case >with the current .deb), but it might be worth looking onto it for the >tarball installing, or documenting it? I don't think we have any way =E2=80=94 from the tarball install =E2=80=94= to add /usr/local to the path if your system doesn't already include it. This issue popped up = on Fedora recently also and I'm inclined to categorize it as a distribution = bug. The typical fix for this is to add /usr/local/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf (or = some such) and run /sbin/ldconfig. This is not something you want to do from a Makefile (and since packages like .rpm and .deb will usually install in s= ystem directories, the issue is moot there). On the other hand, part of the point of libtool AIUI is that it will spit= out a great big warning that you've installed libs in /usr/local and that you n= eed to make the above modifications to /etc/ld.so.conf. It's odd that that's not happening here. Is anyone familiar with libtool and can comment on this? --=20 When I decide that the situation is unacceptable for me, I'll simply fo= rk the tree. I do _not_ appreciate being enlisted into anyone's holy war= s, so unless you _really_ want to go _way_ up in my personal shitlist don= 't play politics in my vicinity. -- Alexander Viro on lk= ml |
From: Gerrit P. H. <ge...@fa...> - 2005-12-01 19:45:21
|
Karl schrieb: > Index: configure.in > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvsroot/openjade/sp/configure.in,v > retrieving revision 1.29.2.39 > diff -w -u -r1.29.2.39 configure.in > --- configure.in 29 Nov 2005 16:23:20 -0000 1.29.2.39 > +++ configure.in 1 Dec 2005 15:07:58 -0000 > @@ -537,7 +537,8 @@ > AC_MSG_ERROR( > [could not find pdfjadetex; set PDFJADETEX or consider --disable-doc-build]) > fi > - AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, > [/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration]) > + AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, > +[/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration:./pubtext]) > if test -z "$XMLDCL" > then > AC_MSG_ERROR( This does not work when building outside the source directory which is the usual way to do this on Cygwin. Better make this AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, [/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration:${srcdir}/pubtext]) or similar. Regards, Gerrit -- =^..^= |
From: Karl E. <ke...@su...> - 2005-12-01 20:14:36
|
"Gerrit P. Haase" <ge...@fa...> writes: > This does not work when building outside the source directory which is > the usual way to do this on Cygwin. Better make this > AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, [/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration:${srcdir}/pubtext]) > or similar. Thanks for the reminder -- you are absolutely right! -- | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) |
From: Neil R. <ne...@oc...> - 2005-12-05 02:55:07
|
On Dec 1, Gerrit P. Haase (ge...@fa...) wrote: > Karl schrieb: > > > > Index: configure.in > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: /cvsroot/openjade/sp/configure.in,v > > retrieving revision 1.29.2.39 > > diff -w -u -r1.29.2.39 configure.in > > --- configure.in 29 Nov 2005 16:23:20 -0000 1.29.2.39 > > +++ configure.in 1 Dec 2005 15:07:58 -0000 > > @@ -537,7 +537,8 @@ > > AC_MSG_ERROR( > > [could not find pdfjadetex; set PDFJADETEX or consider --disable-doc-build]) > > fi > > - AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, > > [/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration]) > > + AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, > > +[/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration:./pubtext]) > > if test -z "$XMLDCL" > > then > > AC_MSG_ERROR( > > > > This does not work when building outside the source directory which is > the usual way to do this on Cygwin. Better make this > AC_PATH_PROG(XMLDCL, xml.dcl,, [/usr/share/sgml:/usr/share/sgml/declaration:${srcdir}/pubtext]) > or similar. I like the idea of just using the local copy in the pubtext subdir, so this searching for xml.dcl would just disappear from configure.in. If there are no objections, I'll make that change. -- Neil Roeth |
From: Gerrit P. H. <ge...@fa...> - 2005-12-01 23:47:37
|
Terje schrieb: > I'm mercilessly nagging on various hapless victi^W^Wfolk to get us Win32 > binaries and to get the package in Fedora Core (and by extension, RHEL) updated > to 1.5.2 for their next releases. > Can I hope someone will do the same for Debian? > How about Fink/Darwinports for Mac OS X? Anyone involved in those? > Any other platforms/distros we could/should target? I'll do the Cygwin version. Currently I test the build with $ gcc --version gcc (GCC) 3.3.3 (cygwin special) Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Getting much warnings here: make[3]: Entering directory `/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/.build/lib' [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT ArcEngine.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/ArcEngine.Tpo" -c -o ArcEngine.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ArcEngine.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/ArcEngine.Tpo" ".deps/ArcEngine.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/ArcEngine.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT ArcEngine.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/ArcEngine.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ArcEngine.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/ArcEngine.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ArcEngine.cxx:21: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Entity.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/Entity.Tpo" -c -o Entity.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Entity.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/Entity.Tpo" ".deps/Entity.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/Entity.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Entity.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/Entity.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Entity.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/Entity.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Entity.cxx:9: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT LinkProcess.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/LinkProcess.Tpo" -c -o LinkProcess.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/LinkProcess.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/LinkProcess.Tpo" ".deps/LinkProcess.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/LinkProcess.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT LinkProcess.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/LinkProcess.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/LinkProcess.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/LinkProcess.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/LinkProcess.cxx:10: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Notation.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/Notation.Tpo" -c -o Notation.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Notation.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/Notation.Tpo" ".deps/Notation.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/Notation.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Notation.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/Notation.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Notation.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/Notation.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Notation.cxx:9: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Parser.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/Parser.Tpo" -c -o Parser.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/Parser.Tpo" ".deps/Parser.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/Parser.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Parser.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/Parser.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/Parser.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.cxx:9: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT ParserState.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/ParserState.Tpo" -c -o ParserState.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/ParserState.Tpo" ".deps/ParserState.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/ParserState.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT ParserState.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/ParserState.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/ParserState.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.cxx:8: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Recognizer.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/Recognizer.Tpo" -c -o Recognizer.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/Recognizer.Tpo" ".deps/Recognizer.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/Recognizer.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Recognizer.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/Recognizer.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/Recognizer.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.cxx:9: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT SgmlParser.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/SgmlParser.Tpo" -c -o SgmlParser.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/SgmlParser.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/SgmlParser.Tpo" ".deps/SgmlParser.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/SgmlParser.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT SgmlParser.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/SgmlParser.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/SgmlParser.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/SgmlParser.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/SgmlParser.cxx:10: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT TrieBuilder.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/TrieBuilder.Tpo" -c -o TrieBuilder.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/TrieBuilder.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/TrieBuilder.Tpo" ".deps/TrieBuilder.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/TrieBuilder.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT TrieBuilder.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/TrieBuilder.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/TrieBuilder.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/TrieBuilder.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/TrieBuilder.cxx:11: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Undo.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/Undo.Tpo" -c -o Undo.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Undo.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/Undo.Tpo" ".deps/Undo.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/Undo.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT Undo.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/Undo.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Undo.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/Undo.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Undo.cxx:9: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. [...] if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseAttribute.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/parseAttribute.Tpo" -c -o parseAttribute.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseAttribute.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/parseAttribute.Tpo" ".deps/parseAttribute.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/parseAttribute.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseAttribute.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parseAttribute.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseAttribute.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/parseAttribute.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseAttribute.cxx:5: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseCommon.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/parseCommon.Tpo" -c -o parseCommon.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseCommon.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/parseCommon.Tpo" ".deps/parseCommon.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/parseCommon.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseCommon.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parseCommon.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseCommon.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/parseCommon.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseCommon.cxx:5: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseDecl.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/parseDecl.Tpo" -c -o parseDecl.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseDecl.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/parseDecl.Tpo" ".deps/parseDecl.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/parseDecl.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseDecl.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parseDecl.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseDecl.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/parseDecl.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseDecl.cxx:7: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseInstance.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/parseInstance.Tpo" -c -o parseInstance.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseInstance.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/parseInstance.Tpo" ".deps/parseInstance.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/parseInstance.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseInstance.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parseInstance.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseInstance.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/parseInstance.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseInstance.cxx:5: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseMode.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/parseMode.Tpo" -c -o parseMode.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseMode.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/parseMode.Tpo" ".deps/parseMode.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/parseMode.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseMode.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parseMode.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseMode.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/parseMode.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseMode.cxx:5: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseParam.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/parseParam.Tpo" -c -o parseParam.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseParam.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/parseParam.Tpo" ".deps/parseParam.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/parseParam.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseParam.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parseParam.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseParam.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/parseParam.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseParam.cxx:5: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. if /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseSd.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/parseSd.Tpo" -c -o parseSd.lo /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseSd.cxx; \ then mv -f ".deps/parseSd.Tpo" ".deps/parseSd.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/parseSd.Tpo"; exit 1; fi g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib -I.. -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include -I/j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/generic -O3 -MT parseSd.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parseSd.Tpo -c /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseSd.cxx -DPIC -o .libs/parseSd.o In file included from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Recognizer.h:15, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/ParserState.h:34, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Parser.h:23, from /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/parseSd.cxx:5: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx: In destructor ` OpenSP::Owner<T>::~Owner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]': /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/CopyOwner.h:16: instantiated from `OpenSP::CopyOwner<T>::CopyOwner() [with T = OpenSP::BlankTrie]' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:22: instantiated from here /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: possible problem detected in invocation of delete operator: /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: warning: invalid use of undefined type `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/lib/Trie.h:18: warning: forward declaration of `struct OpenSP::BlankTrie' /j/OpenSP/OpenSP-1.5.2/include/Owner.cxx:15: note: neither the destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be called, even if they are declared when the class is defined. ... and finally the link fails because of libintl missing on the link command: Creating library file: .libs/libosp.dll.a .libs/MessageTable.o:MessageTable.cxx:(.text+0x92): undefined reference to `_dgettext' .libs/MessageTable.o:MessageTable.cxx:(.text+0x5a): undefined reference to `_bindtextdomain' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [libosp.la] Error 1 I need to add libosp_la_LIBADD = $(LTLIBINTL) to lib/Makefile.am et. al. and regen the Makefile.in. Gerrit -- =^..^= |
From: Neil R. <ne...@oc...> - 2005-12-03 20:35:20
|
It sounds like a great idea to merge the changes back into HEAD. I do think it's your DocBook toolchain that's borked, building the pdf and ps versions of the release notes Works For Me. :-) BTW, I've built the CVS version leading up to this on Debian sid and Sun Solaris, both using G++ 4.0. On the latter, I did not have to disable shared libs to get it to work. Of course, I'll get the package into Debian soon after we do the final release. This will dramatically improve performance on Debian systems, which will be good news. Though I've built what should be the same code already, I'll download the tarball and rebuild that to be sure it works under Debian sid. On Dec 1, Terje Bless (li...@po...) wrote: > Terje Bless <li...@po...> wrote: > > >OpenSP 1.5.2pre1, the first prerelease of OpenSP 1.5.2, has been release= > d! > > And a few quick notes on that=E2=80=A6 > > It's tagged in CVS as =E2=80=9Copensp-1_5_2pre1-release=E2=80=9D and modu= > lo feedback that it has > issues this should be more or less what gets released as 1.5.2. The vario= > us > changes by Neil, Bj=C3=B6rn, and Karl recently seems to have fixed all th= > e major > issues that I'm aware of (not that that's any kind of guarantee). > > I intend to push out a 1.5.2 final release fairly quickly unless someone = > pipes > up with a veto or significant =E2=80=9C-1=E2=80=9D comments. Yes, this is= > an arbitrary and > unilateral decision. No, I have no qualms whatsoever about this. :-) > > ( Feel free to yell at me if I you feel the need though! ) > > Once 1.5.2 goes out I'm thinking I'll take a shot at merging the 1.5 bran= > ch onto > HEAD. Not sure what state HEAD is actually in ATM, but I think it's mostl= > y > Javier's new feature checkins so that should be fine. > > Not really sure whether there is a 1.5.3 or 1.6.0 in the near future. > > > One open issue in 1.5.2pre1 is that I had to disable building of the PS a= > nd PDF > versions of the releasenotes (.html is till there). This is mostly becaus= > e it > interacted badly with what may be a borked DocBook toolchain on my devel = > box > (Neil has fixed everything else so I think it's my box that's borked). De= > pending > on various factors I may end up removing the PS and PDF versions complete= > ly for > the final release (chime in if you have an opinion on this; either way!). > > > Also, for this release, please do at least download and try to build the > tarball. There have been quite significant changes to the build system so > build/fail reports (with: platform, version, GCC version, whatver else se= > ems > relevant) would be very usefull. > > If you have time for nothing else, please try to at least find the time t= > o do a > build and report back pass/fail status! > > > > I'm mercilessly nagging on various hapless victi^W^Wfolk to get us Win32 > binaries and to get the package in Fedora Core (and by extension, RHEL) u= > pdated > to 1.5.2 for their next releases. > > Can I hope someone will do the same for Debian? > > How about Fink/Darwinports for Mac OS X? Anyone involved in those? > > Any other platforms/distros we could/should target? > > > --=20 > =E2=80=9CHath no man's dagger here a point for me?=E2=80=9D - Leonato, = > Governor of Messina. > See Project Gutenberg <URL:http://promo.net/pg/> for m= > ore. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files > for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes > searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click > _______________________________________________ > OpenJade-devel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjade-devel -- Neil Roeth |