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

Re: gcc 2.95.1-2 and ld



> > > Should i upload the X package i will build, or will the autobuilder
> > > take care of it ?
> > 
> > Upload it.
> 
> Ok, i will do it. What is the problem with the mach64 stuff ? any relation with
> the sparc mach64 stuff recently added to the package ?

Yes, it is a problem with Ben's patch for sparc. 


> make[7]: Entering directory `/project/debian/xfree86-1-3.3.4/build-tree/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree68/mach64'
> rm -f mach64fbdev.o
> gcc -c -O2 -fsigned-char  -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/common -I.
> -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/vga256/vga        -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/mfb
> -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/mi -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/include            -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/cfb
> -I../../../../../exports/include/X11 -I../../../../../fonts/include       -I../../../../../include/fonts
> -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/os-support -I../../../../../programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/common_hw  -I../../../../..
> -I../../../../../exports/include  -Dlinux -D__powerpc__ -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199309L -D_POSIX_SOURCE -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500L
> -D_BSD_SOURCE -D_SVID_SOURCE -D_REENTRANT -DSHAPE -DXINPUT -DXKB -DLBX -DXAPPGROUP -DXCSECURITY  -DDPMSExtension -DPIXPRIV
> -DGCCUSESGAS -DSTATIC_COLOR -DAVOID_GLYPHBLT -DPIXPRIV  -DXFreeXDGA -DNDEBUG   -DFUNCPROTO=15 -DNARROWPROTO  -DFBDEV_SERVER
> -DPSZ=8       -DNO_COPY_PLANE         -DNO_FONT_CACHE         -DNO_PIXMAP_CACHE       -DNO_CREATE_GC  mach64fbdev.c
> In file included from mach64fbdev.c:4:
> mach64.h:60: mach64util.h: No such file or directory
> make[7]: *** [mach64fbdev.o] Error 1

mach64util.h should be a sym-link to somewhat ../../xc or so. But this sym-link
weren't created. I removed the #include from mach64.h:60 and after a re-compile 
only one error occur. mach64util.h and the mach64reg.h defines something double
(not all, only parts of it). This must be checked.


Regards,


    Hartmut



Reply to: