delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: | No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,TW_YG |
X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
X-Eon-Dm: | dm0227 |
X-Eon-Sig: | AQMb1uJNWguDFfJydgIAAAAB,e06f537d21e921ca6bc03f332bed38d9 |
Message-ID: | <4D5A0B8C.9050500@member.fsf.org> |
Date: | Mon, 14 Feb 2011 21:13:48 -0800 |
From: | L Anderson <lowella AT member DOT fsf DOT org> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101123 SeaMonkey/2.0.11 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Re: Please add 'AVG Internet Security 2011' to the BLODA list (and cygport also :-) ). |
References: | <4D4F77BE DOT 4000305 AT serv DOT net> <4D50138B DOT 5020001 AT redhat DOT com> |
In-Reply-To: | <4D50138B.5020001@redhat.com> |
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: | rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1012030000 definitions=main-1102140206 |
X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Eric Blake wrote: > On 02/06/2011 09:40 PM, L Anderson wrote: >> In regards to the aforementioned while loop in 'conftest.c'--the logic >> of it being run for every invocation of a 'coreutils' build escapes me. >> I can see running it once per OS, outside of the build process, to >> determine if the given OS does the right thing; after that, shouldn't it >> just be a case of checking if the OS being used has been tested and >> deemed to behave properly? > > Yes, this particular configure test takes a long time, even without > virus scanning, on WinXP (where Microsoft has an O(n^2) implementation); > it's faster on newer Windows (where Microsoft fixed things to be O(n)). > > You can pre-seed a config.site cache to skip the test by using a known > outcome result (in fact, I do just that when building coreutils): > > $ cat>> /usr/config.site<<\EOF > # configure gets the right answer, but only after hammering the system > gl_cv_func_getcwd_path_max=yes > EOF > Thanks for the hint--it allowed me to by-pass the test. However, for the record, based on 'coreutils-8.10-1--configure[3295,3296]', I think you meant: > $ cat>> /usr/share/config.site<<\EOF > # configure gets the right answer, but only after hammering the system > gl_cv_func_getcwd_path_max=yes > EOF xor > $ cat>> /usr/etc/config.site<<\EOF > # configure gets the right answer, but only after hammering the system > gl_cv_func_getcwd_path_max=yes > EOF Correct? I used the latter and it did the trick. Regards, LA -- 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
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |