X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4A7F7113.2080807@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 02:00:03 +0100
From: Dave Korn <dave DOT korn DOT cygwin AT googlemail DOT com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: libffi-3.0
References: <6910a60907272310q54f29289l454117aff82afd5a AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <4A6ED94B DOT 8020003 AT gmail DOT com> <4A7E725C DOT 8010706 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A7ED3C9 DOT 70700 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <4A7F098B DOT 6030904 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A7F1317 DOT 4050800 AT gmail DOT com> <4A7F4184 DOT 6090704 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A7F47D8 DOT 9060409 AT gmail DOT com> <4A7F4F02 DOT 8020501 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
In-Reply-To: <4A7F4F02.8020501@users.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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

Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 09/08/2009 17:04, Dave Korn wrote:

> So let me put it to you this way: I have two packages requiring libffi,
> namely gnustep-base and pygobject2, the latter of which explicitly deps
> libffi-3.0.  Which libffi should I use right now, gcc-4.3.2 or standalone?

  Right now?  Hard to say, you have a choice of two versions that are both known
to be buggy.  I'd check the testsuite results and see which one looks best.
Here are the results from 4.3.2-2's testsuite:

> 		=== libffi tests ===
> 
> 
> Running target unix
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_1_1byte.c output pattern test, is 12 178: 190
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_2byte.c output pattern test, is 12 127 1 13: 13 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/return_sc.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/struct5.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_1_1byte.c output pattern test, is 12 178: 190
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_2byte.c output pattern test, is 12 127 1 13: 13 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/return_sc.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/struct5.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_1_1byte.c output pattern test, is 12 178: 190
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_2byte.c output pattern test, is 12 127 1 13: 13 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/return_sc.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/struct5.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_1_1byte.c output pattern test, is 12 178: 190
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_2byte.c output pattern test, is 12 127 1 13: 13 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/struct5.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_12byte.c output pattern test, is 7 4 9 1 5 3: 8 9 12
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_16byte.c output pattern test, is 7 8 9 1 9 3: 8 17 12
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_18byte.c output pattern test, is 1 127 126 3 4 125 124 5: 5 252 250 8
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_19byte.c output pattern test, is 1 127 126 3 120 4 125 124 5 119: 5 252 250 8 239
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_1_1byte.c output pattern test, is 12 178: 190
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_20byte.c output pattern test, is 1 2 3 4 5 7: 5 7 10
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_20byte1.c output pattern test, is 1 2 3 4 5 7: 5 7 10
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_24byte.c output pattern test, is 9 2 6 5 1 2 3 7 4 5 7 9 8 6 1 9: 22 15 17 25
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_2byte.c output pattern test, is 12 127 1 13: 13 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_3_1byte.c output pattern test, is 12 13 14 178 179 180: 190 192 194
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_5_1_byte.c output pattern test, is 127 120 1 3 4 12 128 9 3 4: 139 248 10 6 8
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_5byte.c output pattern test, is 127 120 1 12 128 9: 139 248 10
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_64byte.c output pattern test, is 22 15 17 25 6 13 19 18
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_6_1_byte.c output pattern test, is 127 120 1 3 4 5 12 128 9 3 4 5: 139 248 10 6 8 10
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_6byte.c output pattern test, is 127 120 1 128 12 128 9 127: 139 248 10 255
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_7_1_byte.c output pattern test, is 127 120 1 3 4 5 6 12 128 9 3 4 5 6: 139 248 10 6 8 10 12
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_9byte1.c output pattern test, is 7 8 1 9: 8 17
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_9byte2.c output pattern test, is 7 8 1 9: 8 17
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_double.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_float.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_longdouble.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_pointer.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_sint16.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_sint32.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_sint64.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_uint16.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_uint32.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_align_uint64.c output pattern test, is 12 4951 127 1 9320 13: 13 14271 140
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct1.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct10.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct2.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct3.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct4.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct6.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct7.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct8.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct9.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/problem1.c output pattern test, is 1 2 3 1 2 3: 2 4 6
> FAIL: libffi.call/return_sc.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/struct5.c execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest.cc execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest_ffi_call.cc execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest.cc execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest_ffi_call.cc execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest.cc execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest_ffi_call.cc execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest.cc execution test
> FAIL: libffi.special/unwindtest_ffi_call.cc execution test
> 
> 		=== libffi Summary ===
> 
> # of expected passes		1325
> # of unexpected failures	65

  You'll probably find that libffi-3.0.8 (the latest release, last December) has
less FAILs, but also less tests overall, so it may be that any differences are
noise and they both suffer the same core bugs.  Given that, it would probably be
easier to use your current libffi-3, just since you won't have to edit the
version dependency...

    cheers,
      DaveK


--
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