[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?
From: |
Deliverable Mail |
Subject: |
[Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version? |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:02:23 -0500 |
> This is why we ship our own version of crypto++ (with, IIRC, some bug
> fixes in it), and always build with either -O0 or "-O2
> -fno-strict-aliasing". I still don't think you've said whether you
> are
> - using the built in version of crypto++
> - compiling with -fno-strict aliasing
> ? Failing to do either of these things could well explain your
> problems.
I do use either the pre-made Makefile with CFLAGS <=> CXXFLAGS = -O2
-fno-strict-aliasing
and O also tried to do = -O0 -fno-strict-aliasing
and I still get the cryptogoawaygreeting instead of db init. Also, in
related news, -quasistatic fails for me as follows:
monotone: gconv.c:58: __gconv: Assertion `outbuf != ((void *)0) &&
*outbuf != ((void *)0)' failed.
monotone: fatal: signal: SIGABRT (application abort requested)
...
Hmm,
Alexy
- [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, (continued)
- [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Deliverable Mail, 2005/03/24
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/03/24
- [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Henry Nestler, 2005/03/24
- [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Deliverable Mail, 2005/03/24
- [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Henry Nestler, 2005/03/24
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/03/24
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/03/24
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/03/24
- [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Henry Nestler, 2005/03/24
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?, Zack Weinberg, 2005/03/24
- [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?,
Deliverable Mail <=