DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:reply-to:subject:to:references:from:message-id
	:date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=uf7NjMkKXIaCvBKa
	UrqbALBNrfuFhw5jxsxfDGVigY3d9ypf6fxQDC23PENqE/Tgim4XWAg86FSzbS2e
	YFUgnxIkGAlhGAhLEVMJX/k7Z67zhV1AoK0lTyc0laZt/tadsGQoOcuZ5dZV//Ti
	iOkvY22wA6yTG+bUunyEP96Zgps=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Reply-To: Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca
Subject: Re: headache on build repeatibility: octave vs BLODA ?
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <2904b4fa-6349-bd3e-c4ff-4b32a0bb3838@gmail.com> <87y2tvs278.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <9b370970-fcfe-cca9-321f-973de777642a@gmail.com> <878sluhcc1.fsf@Otto.invalid> <08ac898e-e7f9-c8e9-91ba-d4ee33f2e27c@gmail.com> <0fb5712c-7d57-d5cb-56b7-3a0d2f44d8a2@gmail.com> <20200127203346.1c8e3657d7283e3aa2c617d8@nifty.ne.jp> <85ddac25-0b4a-5e01-7885-0d2855c37a45@gmail.com> <20200129094427.GI3549@calimero.vinschen.de> <9e66f9f1-109f-7a3c-2c86-abd3ef7fc628@gmail.com> <20200129224653.b3238736661d3c95fc30ee5f@nifty.ne.jp>
From: Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca>
Message-ID: <3ec4538b-3e45-43cc-b96e-a3b8be17bdb9@SystematicSw.ab.ca>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 14:05:12 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200129224653.b3238736661d3c95fc30ee5f@nifty.ne.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2020-01-29 06:46, Takashi Yano wrote:
> Hi Marco,
> 
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:19:11 +0100
> Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> As Octave uses gnulib, it is possible that the changes in MS are causing
>> a different subset of gnulib to be used than before, may be exposing
>> a latent bug or race.
>>
>> Unfortunately my old build tree was polluted by mistake, so I can
>> not directly compare a good build tree versus a failing one.
> 
> I found suspicious difference between the working build and the
> not-working build.
> 
> The not-working build has fflush.o, fseek.o and fseeko.o in
> build/libgnu/.libs
> directory, while the working build does not.
> 
> Also, cygoctave-7.dll of not-working build exports rpl_fflush,
> rpl_fseek and rpl_fseeko, while that of the working build does
> not.
> 
> As a test, I used following patch to forcibly remove the code
> setting REPLACE_FSEEKO to 1 in configure script, and rebuilt
> octave. This works without segmentation fault.

For these to be considered missing or deficient such that they should be
provided or replaced gnulib must consider Cygwin lacking support for ANSI C
fflush https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/MODULES.html#ansic_enh_stdio
and POSIX 2008 fseek and fseeko supporting pipes and 4GB in 32 bit mode
https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/MODULES.html#posix_sup
perhaps as a result of incorrect conclusions about Cygwin in autoreconf?

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains
too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.

--
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