Re: headache on build repeatibility: octave vs BLODA ?

[Marco Atzeri <marco.atzeri@gmail.com>]

Am 30.01.2020 um 22:05 schrieb Brian Inglis:
> On 2020-01-29 06:46, Takashi Yano wrote:
>> Hi Marco,
>>
>> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:19:11 +0100
>> Marco Atzeri wrote:
>>> As Octave uses gnulib, it is possible that the changes in MS are causing
>>> a different subset of gnulib to be used than before, may be exposing
>>> a latent bug or race.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately my old build tree was polluted by mistake, so I can
>>> not directly compare a good build tree versus a failing one.
>>
>> I found suspicious difference between the working build and the
>> not-working build.
>>
>> The not-working build has fflush.o, fseek.o and fseeko.o in
>> build/libgnu/.libs
>> directory, while the working build does not.
>>
>> Also, cygoctave-7.dll of not-working build exports rpl_fflush,
>> rpl_fseek and rpl_fseeko, while that of the working build does
>> not.
>>
>> As a test, I used following patch to forcibly remove the code
>> setting REPLACE_FSEEKO to 1 in configure script, and rebuilt
>> octave. This works without segmentation fault.
> 
> For these to be considered missing or deficient such that they should be
> provided or replaced gnulib must consider Cygwin lacking support for ANSI C
> fflush https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/MODULES.html#ansic_enh_stdio
> and POSIX 2008 fseek and fseeko supporting pipes and 4GB in 32 bit mode
> https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/MODULES.html#posix_sup
> perhaps as a result of incorrect conclusions about Cygwin in autoreconf?
> 

I was able to rebuild 5.1.0 successfully on a x86_64 cygwin1.dll
built from git source.
Nor flush or fseek gnulib modules were built.

During weekend I will replicate with i686.

Regards
Marco


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple