|
From: Dirk E. <ed...@de...> - 2002-02-15 20:42:02
|
Luigi, Thanks a big bunch for getting the nasty details out from under the carpet... On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:31:06PM +0100, Luigi Ballabio wrote: > At 7:49 AM -0600 2/15/02, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > >On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 10:36:21AM +0000, Luigi Ballabio wrote: > >> At 04:29 PM 2/14/02 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > >> >Here is another g++-3.0 bug report regarding quantlib, or in particular > >> the > > > >Ruby bindings. I'd appreciate any comments. Luigi? > > Ok, here's the final word from the Ruby gurus. > > It's a bug in the Ruby headers. It needs a fix in Ruby which has been > done in the Ruby development branch (Ruby 1.7.something) but not in > the current release (or at least not the one in Woody. I don't know > which version of Ruby you have in... wait, what was the name of the > character now? Well, unstable anyway) It's called "sid". There is a ruby1.7_1.7.2.0cvs2002.01.18-1 package. We could try that. > It also needs a minor fix in SWIG which has been done in CVS but > wasn't released either. Okay, but as we figured, I don't need, or should, re-run swig anyway. So if you can get hands on a reworked version, we could try a new QL snapshort of QuantLib-Ruby. If we want it that badly which maybe we don't. > The bottom line is, we're out in the cold :( > Architectures with gcc 3.0.x are ruled out for the time being. That's probably ok, especially as the fix will be forthcoming. LaMont: In a situation like this, is it ok if I actually prevent building on hppa and ia64 via an explicit Architecture: tag in debian/control? Dirk -- Good judgement comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement. -- Fred Brooks |