From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21528 invoked from network); 23 May 2001 09:39:11 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 23 May 2001 09:39:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 647 invoked by alias); 23 May 2001 09:38:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 14452 Received: (qmail 624 invoked from network); 23 May 2001 09:38:47 -0000 X-Envelope-Sender-Is: Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru (at relayer goliath.siemens.de) Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 13:38:23 +0400 (MSD) From: Andrej Borsenkow X-X-Sender: To: cc: Paul Ackersviller Subject: Re: 64-bit sparc instructions In-Reply-To: <1010523044128.ZM23100@candle.brasslantern.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 23 May 2001, Bart Schaefer wrote: > On May 22, 8:04pm, Paul Ackersviller wrote: > } > } [...] What does make a difference is simply generating default 32-bit > } sparc instructions. I'd negelected to mention that I was using Sun's > } compiler and 64-bit code. I suppose it's fair to blame this one on Sun. > > Is that problem solved by the following? > > On May 22, 2:32pm, Clint Adams wrote: > } Subject: Re: 4.0.1-pre-5 (solaris issues) > } > } > the 64-bit Forte compiler. Can you figure out what we need to be passing > } > as a compiler argument that we aren't, or whatever? > } > } LFS64_CFLAGS: -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE > } LFS_CFLAGS: -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 > } > } By replacing the latter with the former, the test [succeeds]. > > If so, can you identify a configure test we can use to decide when to > use LFS64_CFLAGS instead of LFS_CFLAGS ? (The existing test is in the > definition of zsh_LARGE_FILE_SUPPORT in aczsh.m4.) > > Hmm ... they both have very different semantic. LFS means, use existing interfaces but assume some parameters are 64 bit (off_t, size_t, ino_t to name some). LFS64 means - you are explicitly using special 64-bit version of these interfaces (open64 vs. open, stat64 vs. stat etc) that are using special types (off64_t, ino64_t etc). Zsh is not designed to do it. So, if the above change really helped, it was just because zsh was actually compiled in 32-bit mode :-) We simply need better detection if LFS really works. Could you provide testcase suitable for putting in configure? -andrej