Thread: [Pyme-help] Re: FTBFS: 'alloc2' undeclared
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
belyi
From: Igor B. <be...@us...> - 2006-04-05 23:59:47
|
Sorry, I'm on LinuxWorld Expo this week and won't be able to look at this until next week. If this switch appears just in 1.3.28 swig then the change should be a little bit bigger for back compatibility. Shortly, I greatly appreciate the patch - it gives me the right direction where I need to look for details. Thanks, Igor Arnaud Fontaine wrote: > Hello, > > This bug [0] is due to swig upgrade. Actually, pyme builds fine with > swig < 1.3.28. In swig 1.3.28, there is a new option, namely 'match', > for typemaps. > > I have attached the patch which fixes this bug. I have built and tested > pyme successfully using this patch. Could you please make an upgrade of > pyme for swig 1.3.28 ? Thanks a lot to Manuel Menal for his help for > tracking the bug. > > Regards, > Arnaud Fontaine > > [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=358648 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > --- gpgme.i.old 2006-04-02 16:23:02.000000000 +0200 > +++ gpgme.i 2006-04-02 15:43:27.000000000 +0200 > @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ > > // Allow use of None for strings. > > -%typemap(python,in) const char * { > +%typemap(match="in") const char * { > if ($input == Py_None) > $1 = NULL; > else if (PyString_Check($input)) > |
From: Igor B. <be...@us...> - 2006-04-12 17:34:33
|
OK, I've looked at it and I'm sorry to say I don't think this is the right patch. It seems to me that the patch disables gpgme.i's "const char *" typemap definition by using SWIG's bug of not reporting invalid syntax but silently ignoring it to work around another SWIG bug of the typemap causing alloc2 and buf2 not to be declared while statements freeing them to be present. I'm still trying to find the right workaround for this. For now it seems SWIG 1.3.28 is not good version to use for pyme build. Thanks for finding this out! :-) Igor Arnaud Fontaine wrote: > Hello, > > This bug [0] is due to swig upgrade. Actually, pyme builds fine with > swig < 1.3.28. In swig 1.3.28, there is a new option, namely 'match', > for typemaps. > > I have attached the patch which fixes this bug. I have built and tested > pyme successfully using this patch. Could you please make an upgrade of > pyme for swig 1.3.28 ? Thanks a lot to Manuel Menal for his help for > tracking the bug. > > Regards, > Arnaud Fontaine > > [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=358648 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > --- gpgme.i.old 2006-04-02 16:23:02.000000000 +0200 > +++ gpgme.i 2006-04-02 15:43:27.000000000 +0200 > @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ > > // Allow use of None for strings. > > -%typemap(python,in) const char * { > +%typemap(match="in") const char * { > if ($input == Py_None) > $1 = NULL; > else if (PyString_Check($input)) > |
From: Igor B. <be...@us...> - 2006-04-12 18:18:43
Attachments:
pyme-swig1.3.28.patch
|
Igor Belyi wrote: > I'm still trying to find the right workaround for this. For now it > seems SWIG 1.3.28 is not good > version to use for pyme build. I've got it! Here's a slightly better patch which should not break back compatibility and does not use undocumented features. I'm making similar changes in CVS as well. Cheers, Igor |
From: Arnaud F. <ar...@an...> - 2006-04-12 18:38:35
|
>>>>> "Igor" == Igor Belyi <be...@us...> writes: Igor> I've got it! Here's a slightly better patch which should not Igor> break back compatibility and does not use undocumented Igor> features. I'm making similar changes in CVS as well. Hello Igor, Are you planning a new stable release of pyme soon which will include this patch ? Regards, Arnaud Fontaine |
From: Igor B. <be...@us...> - 2006-04-12 19:15:17
|
Arnaud Fontaine wrote: > Are you planning a new stable release of pyme soon which will include > this patch ? > Well.. I do plan 0.7.1 release "any minute now" for the last half an year. :-( I want to figure out why do I still have problems with MinGW32 built PyMe on Windows. The problems boils down to gpgme problems with talking to gnupg.exe and obstacted by my inability to find the right time to "really" look at them. I guess I would try newly released GnuPG 1.4.4 to see if it is fixed there... But as for "when" - that's the hard question. In short, I'd suggest to add this patch in a debian specific release to avoid its eviction from the testing or to speed up the inclusion into one. :-) The new 0.7.1 release will have just the Windows build and 2 (including this one) bug fixes which is not too much "value-add" for Debian. Cheers, Igor |