[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: static build was: 1.3.1 tarballs up for testing/signing (Again)

From: Johannes Holzer <hl-svn_at_arcor.de>
Date: 2006-03-29 08:56:42 CEST

Am Dienstag, 28. MÀrz 2006 18:37 schrieb Philip Martin:
> Johannes Holzer <hl-svn@arcor.de> writes:
> > I want to get some static build, but i failed (again). Can somebody post
> > me the correct configure-command?
> Be aware that static executable don't always work if you build/run on
> Linux machines with different GNU C libraries.
Thanks for your warning. I this case I will probably not need the static
build. I'll check this....

> The "expected 1.3.0" bit indicates that your build is picking up
> svn_version.h from somewhere other that the tarball source. Compiling
> against the wrong headers is likely to cause crashes. You/we need to
> investigate the compile command to determine why that is happening.
> Get a compile command:
> [...]
> and find out which svn_version.h is being used. In my case it's
> ../subversion-1.3.1/subversion/include/svn_version.h
> which is as expected given the -I../subversion-1.3.1/subversion/include
> flag near the start of the compile command.

i get the line . ../subversion-1.3.1-alpha/subversion/include/svn_version.h

This seems correct, right?

You can find the complete log in the Attachement.

You also can find the output of a make check in the Attachement, where some
tests fail.

By the way, the "normal build" (configure with only --prefix-option) fails at
the same tests, but does not give compile warnings.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Received on Wed Mar 29 08:59:22 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.