develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from May 2012

Re: Smoke [5.15.9] v5.15.9-270-g5a0c7e9 FAIL(m) HP-UX B.11.00/64(PA-RISC2.0/64/2 cpu)

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Nicholas Clark
May 5, 2012 01:43
Re: Smoke [5.15.9] v5.15.9-270-g5a0c7e9 FAIL(m) HP-UX B.11.00/64(PA-RISC2.0/64/2 cpu)
Message ID:
On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 10:31:45AM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:

> Wow, what dig-work.


> This is indeed insane. It probably only #fail this way on PA-RISC, as
> the itanium boxes seem to accept these. I do not expect HP to come with
> a fix, as PA-RISC is kinda abandoned. I could try to contact them.

If it's in support, please do contact them. I'd hope that they'd agree
that it's a bug, even if they don't want to fix it.

> Shall I alter the hints to drop +O when -g is in place?

I guess so. Although it sort of feels more like fixing the symptoms than the
problem. In that I think also Configure should have validated the combined
compiler flags it created worked (which probably isn't that hard to add)
and then (at least) bailed out (easy).

But ideally it would have gone "oh, I can't add -g" or "I can add -g but I'll
have to ignore optimize", because I'm quite surprised that any compiler other
than gcc is happy with -O and -g. But that's harder.

IIRC the "old style" way of things was that -DDEBUGGING was added if "optimize"
contained -g, so there wasn't this problem. There *was* the problem that people
(rightly) didn't expect the slowdown from -DDEBUGGING if all they wanted to do
was add C level debugging symbols.

Nicholas Clark

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About