octave-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscall


From: Philip Nienhuis
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 10:53:08 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100701 SeaMonkey/2.0.6

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #40606 (project octave):

<OCTAVE_HOME>/bin/sort.exe sneaks in because it is part of msys-coreutils that
gets built in mxe-octave.

E.g., renaming it to __sort.exe (in the installed binary on Windows) removes
the syscalls.cc FAIL.

But somehow this is a bit intriguing.
Am I right to think (based on Windows PATH) that Octave is supposed to pick up
sort.exe in C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32 (that does accept an "/R" flag)?

>> strsplit (getenv("PATH"), pathsep)
ans =
{
  [1,1] = C:\Programs\Python33\
  [1,2] = C:\WINDOWS\system32
  [1,3] = C:\WINDOWS
  [1,4] = C:\WINDOWS\System32\Wbem
  [1,5] = C:\Programs\TortoiseSVN\bin
  [1,6] = C:\Programs\gs\gs9.04\bin
  [1,7] = C:\Programs\QuickTime\QTSystem\
  [1,8] = C:\Programs\Mercurial
  [1,9] = X:\Octave\octave-2013-11-16-20-38\bin
  [1,10] = X:\Octave\octave-2013-11-16-20-38\notepad++
  [1,11] =
X:\Octave\octave-2013-11-16-20-38\libexec\octave\3.7.7+\site\exec\i686-pc-mingw32
  [1,12] =
X:\Octave\octave-2013-11-16-20-38\libexec\octave\api-v48+\site\exec\i686-pc-mingw32
  [1,13] =
X:\Octave\octave-2013-11-16-20-38\libexec\octave\site\exec\i686-pc-mingw32
  [1,14] =
X:\Octave\octave-2013-11-16-20-38\libexec\octave\3.7.7+\exec\i686-pc-mingw32
  [1,15] = X:\Octave\octave-2013-11-16-20-38\bin
}


Apparently Octave prefers the sort.exe in <OCTAVE_HOME>/bin even when it
appears last in the system PATH. Note that I have no "." in my Windows PATH.

For mxe-octave builds, the easiest solution /to get this specific test to
succeed/ would be to not build sort.exe or remove it from the dist (it is in
<mxe-octave>/msys-base/bin/).
But the test is meant for pipes (or actually system utility calls), not for a
specific utility program. 

Yet does uncover a problem.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?40606>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]