RE: [MXE MinGW] miscompiled gcc for --enable64?

[JohnD]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Nienhuis [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 3:02 PM
> To: JohnD; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [MXE MinGW] miscompiled gcc for --enable64?
> 
> JohnD wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Philip Nienhuis [mailto:address@hidden
> >> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 1:09 AM
> >> To: JohnD
> >> Subject: Re: [MXE MinGW] miscompiled gcc for --enable64?
> >>
> >> JohnD wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Philip Nienhuis [mailto:address@hidden
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:39 PM
> >>>> To: JohnD; address@hidden
> >>>> Subject: Re: [MXE MinGW] miscompiled gcc for --enable64?
> >>>>
> >>>> JohnD wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Philip Nienhuis [mailto:address@hidden
> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 4:42 PM
> >>>>>> To: JohnD; address@hidden
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [MXE MinGW] miscompiled gcc for --enable64?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Philip Nienhuis wrote:
> >>>>>>>> After running build-packages, the following OF packages:
> >>>>>>>>       image,
> >>>>>>>>       fl-core,
> >>>>>>>>       odepkg and
> >>>>>>>>       netcdf
> >>>>>>>> are still missing due to compile errors.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Same on 3.9.0+ cross-built with --enable-64.
> >>>>>> In addition, building ltfat also breaks (probably also on 3.8.2
> >>>>>> but
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >>> Either not identical builds, OR the target machines run differently ?
> >>> Ie: does it behave differently on your windows machine vs my windows
> >>> machine with a installer that was built on a common machine?
> >>
> >> The error message from e.g., building OF ltfat is quite clear: it
> >> can't
> > find the
> >> definition of int64_t.
> >> I doubt that target machines can run so differently as to influence
> > include file
> >> stuff.
> >> But then again - who knows?
> >>
> >> The only thing I can think of is that the host build system's build
> >> tools
> > (gcc etc.)
> >> that are used to build the cross-compiler (that in turn is used to
> >> build
> > Octave) run
> >> differently.
> >>
> >> But you know what, I'll put my Octave64-3.9.0+ zip on my dropbox.
> >> Then you can see for yourself.
> <snip>
> >>
> >> If you could put your version up somewhere I'll gladly try it out.
> >
> > Ok - I see the same thing with lfat with your version.
> > I have copied up my 64 bit v3.8.2 if you want to try that - it appears
> > to successfully install all the packages.
> <snip>
> 
> John, I see the difference between your and mine build and it looks to be
simple
> miscommunication between us.
> You simply didn't have a 64-bit enabled on your 3.8.2 build:
> 
>  >> octave_config_info.USE_64_BIT_IDX_T
> ans = no
>  >>
> 
> I suppose you only have specified --enable-windows-64 but not --enable-64.
> That means you have an Octave version that runs only on 64-bit windows,
but
> can't use arrays > 2 GB.
> 
> Try a build with --enable-64 (that automatically implies
> --enable-windows-64) and then try to install OF-image, ltfat, odepkg,
fl-core and
> netcdf.
> 
> Philip

Will try that