X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=IRrSMtwRpuSpU3aCiPHT4C8WqNxIs4pHoNi7lLYwaaAJDlGSLCACq
	UbEH4jnFE1kGLxcQ1Vn3cvcWygiVl/t3TDUVT2sYxWgrLAWl6WswaRVwc9W5zlb0
	jyddnmZ5wRxgnnbvZYmA+ERm7jnX6N2jUTocFj6zUUWpIxhR4ERaRU=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	 bh=8JkmFpH7DX0KXVF1hkje3kPpTn8=; b=qrPV3HGl91lx/wBv9xcKmgc8F5s1
	86sBKPF+BBhU7uuUgTzx9rgwEnX7GP67bET4icV9UB3wXR1367TmPdyKAepy1H9d
	WScone2jLpDTXxY77l9/DmgZiCdGjg5scA9igfEBasKDc+cTGnl85dOE0OB2dZqw
	MP57fq5lZeigmsw=
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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-112.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,GOOD_FROM_CORINNA_CYGWIN,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*F:D*cygwin.com
X-HELO: mout.kundenserver.de
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 16:34:28 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: headache on build repeatibility: octave vs BLODA ?
Message-ID: <20200129153428.GP3549@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <9b370970-fcfe-cca9-321f-973de777642a AT gmail DOT com> <878sluhcc1 DOT fsf AT Otto DOT invalid> <08ac898e-e7f9-c8e9-91ba-d4ee33f2e27c AT gmail DOT com> <0fb5712c-7d57-d5cb-56b7-3a0d2f44d8a2 AT gmail DOT com> <20200127203346 DOT 1c8e3657d7283e3aa2c617d8 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> <85ddac25-0b4a-5e01-7885-0d2855c37a45 AT gmail DOT com> <20200129094427 DOT GI3549 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <9e66f9f1-109f-7a3c-2c86-abd3ef7fc628 AT gmail DOT com> <20200129224653 DOT b3238736661d3c95fc30ee5f AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> <20200129153218 DOT GO3549 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="LJm8egi4vkexsie5"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200129153218.GO3549@calimero.vinschen.de>

--LJm8egi4vkexsie5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Jan 29 16:32, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jan 29 22:46, Takashi Yano wrote:
> > --- m4/fseeko.m4.orig   2020-01-29 21:39:37.280507900 +0900
> > +++ m4/fseeko.m4        2020-01-29 21:36:29.263747100 +0900
> > @@ -30,16 +30,19 @@
> >      HAVE_FSEEKO=3D0
> >    else
> >      if test $WINDOWS_64_BIT_OFF_T =3D 1; then

This makes me a bit suspicious... it looks like a check only
required for native builds, not for Cygwin.

> > -      REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D1
> > +      dnl REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D1
> > +      REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D0
> >      fi
> >      if test $gl_cv_var_stdin_large_offset =3D no; then
> > -      REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D1
> > +      dnl REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D1
> > +      REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D0
> >      fi
> >      m4_ifdef([gl_FUNC_FFLUSH_STDIN], [
> >        gl_FUNC_FFLUSH_STDIN
> >        case "$gl_cv_func_fflush_stdin" in
> >          *yes) ;;
> > -        *) REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D1 ;;
> > +        dnl *) REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D1 ;;
> > +        *) REPLACE_FSEEKO=3D0 ;;
> >        esac
>=20
> Commit 59362c80e3a in newlib you mention in your other mail should be a
> minor change and the code looks pretty much the same in FreeBSD, while
> OpenBSD and NetBSD are more similar to the old newlib code.  Both
> implementations should be ok, in theory.
>=20
> So, the question is, what exactly is this test testing?  Can it be
> extracted from the autoconf stuff and converted to a simple testcase
> which proves that the behaviour is now wrong?
>=20
> If so, I'll revert commit 59362c80e3a.


Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer

--LJm8egi4vkexsie5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=mVEK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--LJm8egi4vkexsie5--