Re: Failed gui test:NSView_autoresize_and_rounding WAS: gnustep compiled with clang and gworkspace problem

[Sebastian Reitenbach]

Hi,  
On Wednesday, October 5, 2011 11:51 CEST, David Chisnall <theraven@sucs.org> 
wrote: 
 
> On 5 Oct 2011, at 10:46, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Wednesday, October 5, 2011 11:18 CEST, Fred Kiefer <fredkiefer@gmx.de> 
> > wrote: 
> > 
> >> First off and completely unrelated to the actual issue: GNUstep seems to 
> >> use fake main on your system. Why is this the case? As far as I know >> 
> >> this shouldn't be needed on any normal operating system. Could you 
> >> please check the configuration output of base to find out what is going 
> >> on here?
> > 
> > what is actually the purpose of this fake main? I just hear the first time 
> > about it.
> 
> GNUstep needs access to the program arguments.  If there is a libc API for 
> doing this, it could use that.  Typically it uses procfs to look up the 
> arguments.  If neither of these is available, it will interpose its own 
> main() function in front of the real one so that it can capture argc / argv 
> and then call your main().  This is a really ugly hack, but it's sometimes 
> the only option...
> 
> > configure is called this way:
> > 
> > 
> >  $ ./configure --disable-procfs --disable-procfs-psinfo --enable-debug 
> > --disable-strip --prefix=/usr/local --sysconfdir=/etc 
> > --mandir=/usr/local/man --infodir=/usr/local/info --disable-silent-rules
> 
> If you're disabling procfs, then you're probably getting fake main.

...
> > so it's set unconditionally.
> > 
> > I can remove the line, and retry rebuilding everything and test whether it 
> > will work without the fake main.
> 
> It will only work if there is some other mechanism for getting the arguments. 
>  I don't know if there is a codepath for OpenBSD.  If not, and there is a 
> sensible way of accessing it, then it's worth adding...

procfs is not activated per default. I could mount it, and retry if it works. 
But then, users of gnustep would be forced to activate that before they are 
able to use it.
the mount_procfs also has a -o linux option to add linux compatibility, so it 
might not even compatible with existing code.
Besides its ugly, and forces one more step to do on the user before he can use 
gnustep programs, is there any good advantage of using procfs instead of the 
fake main?
Will stuff be noticeably faster, more stable, whatever?

thanks,
Sebastian

> 
> David
> 
> -- Sent from my brain
>