[#10492] Ruby 1.8.6 preview3 has been released — "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@...>

Hi,

26 messages 2007/03/04
[#10500] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 preview3 has been released — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...> 2007/03/05

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Akinori MUSHA wrote:

[#10507] Dynamic Array#join with block — <noreply@...>

Patches item #9055, was opened at 2007-03-05 19:57

12 messages 2007/03/05
[#10520] Re: [ ruby-Patches-9055 ] Dynamic Array#join with block — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/03/06

Hi,

[#10594] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org>

In ext/thread/thread.c, remove_one leaves the list in an inconsistent state.

15 messages 2007/03/14
[#10596] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/14

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:15:57 +0900, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@m4x.org> wrote:

[#10597] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org> 2007/03/14

> > The fix is in thread-mutex-remove_one.diff.

[#10598] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/14

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:19:04 +0900, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@m4x.org> wrote:

[#10599] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org> 2007/03/14

On Wednesday 14 March 2007 17:29, MenTaLguY wrote:

[#10600] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/14

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:48:42 +0900, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@m4x.org> wrote:

[#10615] Multiton in standard library — TRANS <transfire@...>

Hi--

16 messages 2007/03/15
[#10619] Re: Multiton in standard library — Tom Pollard <tomp@...> 2007/03/16

[#10620] Re: Multiton in standard library — TRANS <transfire@...> 2007/03/16

On 3/15/07, Tom Pollard <tomp@earthlink.net> wrote:

[#10646] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #9376, was opened at 2007-03-19 15:58

12 messages 2007/03/19
[#10647] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2007/03/19

noreply@rubyforge.org wrote:

[#10648] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org> 2007/03/19

On Monday 19 March 2007 18:01, Urabe Shyouhei wrote:

[#10651] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/03/19

Hi,

[#10665] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — "Chris Carter" <cdcarter@...> 2007/03/20

On 3/19/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#10712] Ruby Method Signatures (was Re: Multiton in standard library) — "Rick DeNatale" <rick.denatale@...>

On 3/19/07, TRANS <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:

10 messages 2007/03/21
[#10715] Re: Ruby Method Signatures (was Re: Multiton in standard library) — Jos Backus <jos@...> 2007/03/22

On 3/19/07, TRANS <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:

[#10798] Virtual classes and 'real' classes -- why? — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>

I was wondering if someone could help me understand why there's a parallel =

12 messages 2007/03/28
[#10799] Re: Virtual classes and 'real' classes -- why? — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/28

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 04:44:16 +0900, "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@microsoft.com> wrote:

Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9604 ] mkmf find_header doesn't modify compiler include path in generated Makefile

From: Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
Date: 2007-03-27 19:35:56 UTC
List: ruby-core #10795
noreply@rubyforge.org wrote:
> Bugs item #9604, was opened at 2007-03-26 22:09
> You can respond by visiting: 
> http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=9604&group_id=426
> 
> Category: Standard Library
> Group: None
> Status: Open
> Resolution: None
> Priority: 3
> Submitted By: Riley Lynch (rlynch)
> Assigned to: Nobody (None)
> Summary: mkmf find_header doesn't modify compiler include path in generated Makefile
> 
> Initial Comment:
> The doc for find_header reads in part:
> 
>   If the header is found then the path it was found on is added to the list
>   of included directories that are sent to the compiler (via the -I switch).
> 
> However, although the search is correctly performed, it does not appear to affect the Makefile output. The implementation of find_header (around line 640 in mkmf.rb for ruby 1.8.4) reads in part:
> 
>   if try_cpp(cpp_include(header), opt)
>     $INCFLAGS << " " << opt
>     found = true
>     break
>   end
> 
> However, $INCFLAGS does not appear in the "configuration" method which generates the Makefile text. ($CPPFLAGS does, however.)
> 
> Compare find_library, which augments LIBS and LIBPATH in the Makefile if the corresponding library is found.

Works for me as advertised on Solaris 10 with Ruby 1.8.6. I stuck a 
test.h file in my home directory and ran extconf.rb over it.

# In the extconf.rb file
find_header('test.h', '/export/home/djberge')

# In the Makefile
$INCFLAGS = -I. -I$(topdir) -I$(hdrdir) -I$(srcdir) -I/export/home/djberge

What I *think* may have tricked you is that it doesn't use an absolute 
path, so if you do this:

find_header('test.h', Dir.pwd)

Then extconf.rb will merely turn that into another "-I.", instead of 
giving you the expanded path. Is that what happened?

Regards,

Dan

In This Thread

Prev Next