[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-sparc
Subject:    Re: RealPlayer for Sparc/Linux available for immediate download
From:       Ben Collins <bcollins () debian ! org>
Date:       2000-07-04 6:46:19
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 04:37:41PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>    Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 19:15:53 -0400
>    From: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
> 
>    Dave, when was this change made, and why doesn't it show up in
>    stock sources?
> 
> There were no changes, these values have always been this way.
> 
> In fact I cannot remember ever seeing linux/soundcard.h being modified
> in any way whatsoever in the 2.2.x series in fact.
> 
> The debian sparc compiler is different, is it defining the "sun" cpp
> symbol by default or something equally silly?  This would change the
> values used.

The Debian potato sparc compiler is completely default and stock source. I
don't have anything special defined nor patched into it. Here are the
default defines:

[bmc@blimpo(10:42am)-~]%gcc --version
2.95.2
[bmc@blimpo(2:10am)-~]%gcc -E -dM - < /dev/null
#define __linux__ 1
#define __GCC_NEW_VARARGS__ 1
#define linux 1
#define __GNUC_MINOR__ 95
#define __unix 1
#define __unix__ 1
#define __GNUC__ 2
#define __sparc__ 1
#define __linux 1
#define __ELF__ 1
#define unix 1

When the sample source is compiled it uses this define from soundcard.h for
_SIOR:

#define _SIOR           _IOR

Seems to me that the problem is the check for defined(sparc). I've been
having issues with the default gcc defines not including "sparc". If I
manually define that, the program output is as expected.

Now, I checked the default defines for the gcc-2.96 sparc-linux compile,
and it also does not define "sparc". So I checked redhat 6.2 (egcs 1.1.2)
and rawhide (gcc 2.96 CVS aswell, no gcc-2.95.x binary to check against)
and found that redhat-6.2 egcs 1.1.2 does define "sparc", however the
rawhide gcc 2.96 CVS binary does not. So rawhide currently will have the
same problems that Debian is having.

So the questions is, change gcc to (again) define "sparc" as it used to,
or fix everything (like I've been doing with other programs in Debian) to
use __sparc__ (which seems to make more sense, but is a lot harder). I
need to resolve this fairly soon considering potato is expected to go out
the door in a matter of weeks and the Release Manager isn't very kind to
what might be considered a "minor" update :)

-- 
 -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  bcollins@debian.org  --  bcollins@openldap.org  --  bcollins@linux.com  '
 `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of the message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]