[#11073] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10527, was opened at 2007-05-02 14:42
Hi,
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:51:18PM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
This seems to make valgrind much happier.
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 11:14:35PM +0900, Paul Brannan wrote:
Hi,
Now 'a' shows up twice in the local table:
Hi,
[#11082] Understanding code: Kernel#require and blocks. — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
I'm trying to debug a Rails application which complains about an
On 5/4/07, Hugh Sasse <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007, George wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 06:18:19PM +0900, Hugh Sasse wrote:
[#11108] pattern for implementation-private constants? — David Flanagan <david@...>
Hi,
I believe there isn't a way, but I don't think it's really necessary. Just
[#11127] Bugs that can be closed — "Jano Svitok" <jan.svitok@...>
I propose closing these bugs as invalid:
[#11145] Rational comparison to 0 fails when denominator is != 1 — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10739, was opened at 2007-05-10 22:06
Hi,
[#11169] Allow back reference with nest level in Oniguruma for Ruby again — =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Wolfgang_N=E1dasi-Donner?= <wonado@...>
Remark: I posted this text in comp.lang.ruby first, but Matz told me,
Does it make sense or is it required to write this as a RCR?
[#11176] FileUtils.rm_rf misfeature? — johan556@...
Hi!
[#11210] Pathname ascend and descend inclusive parameter — TRANS <transfire@...>
I would like to suggest that Pathname#ascend and Pathname#descend
[#11234] Planning to release 1.8.6 errata — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>
Hi all.
On 25/05/07, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#11252] Init_stack and ruby_init_stack fail to reinit stack (threads problem?) — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #11134, was opened at 2007-05-25 12:14
Hi,
Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
[#11255] ruby_1_8_6 build problem (make install-doc) — johan556@...
Hi!
[#11271] providing better support through rubyforge tracker categories — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
I'm going to make more categories for the trackers (bugs and patches)
[#11367] BUG: next in lambda: 1.8.6 differs from 1.8.4 and 1.9.0 — David Flanagan <david@...>
A toplevel next statement in a lambda does not return a value in 1.8.6,
[#11368] $2000 USD Reward for help fixing Segmentation Fault in GC — Brent Roman <brent@...>
Hi Brent,
Re: Error compiling ruby from source
Sorry to be a pest - if this is an incorrect forum to be posting this in I'm terribly sorry... Please point me in the right direction. Anyway, I've dug a little bit more, and it seems to happen when I make the bigdecimal part. The compand that seems to trip up building Ruby is: gcc -shared -rdynamic -Wl,-export-dynamic -L'../..' -o ../../.ext/x86_64-liux/bigdecimal.so bigdecimal.o -lcrypt -lm -lc And the error I get is: /usr/bin/ld: /opt/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/3.4.6/../../../../lib64/libm .a(k_standard.o): relocation R_X86_64_32S against `a local symbol' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC /opt/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/3.4.6/../../../../lib64/libm .a: could not read symbols: Bad value collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Do you guys think I should file a bug report? ________________________________ From: Costas Piliotis [mailto:cpiliotis@riptown.com] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:46 AM To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Subject: Error compiling ruby from source Hi folks. I've been getting an error message when compiling ruby from source, and I'm sure it's just a missing package. I have two x86_64 RHEL 4 boxes, and one of them I'm having a helluva time trying to install Ruby. I can get 1.8.6 to build on one RHEL 4 box and not the other. It seems to trip on bigdecimal.c : gcc -shared -rdynamic -Wl,-export-dynamic -L'../..' -o ../../.ext/x86_64-linux/bigdecimal.so bigdecimal.o -lcrypt -lm -lc /usr/bin/ld: /opt/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/3.4.6/../../../../lib64/libm .a(k_standard.o): relocation R_X86_64_32S against `a local symbol' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC /opt/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/3.4.6/../../../../lib64/libm .a: could not read symbols: Bad value When I run the configure script on both boxes, the only major difference I get on the new box is: checking for dlopen in -ldl... no checking for dlopen... no On the old box it gets yes for both... The new box has newer versions of gcc and glibc and all that, plus a newer kernel Anyone got any thoughts on where to look?