fopen always returns fid=-1 since revision 8380
Thomas Treichl
Thomas.Treichl at gmx.net
Mon Dec 8 09:56:58 CST 2008
Jaroslav Hajek schrieb:
> Thomas,
>
> I guess that by 8380 you meant 8379, because 8380 in savannah is "fix
> & improve speed of diagonal matrix multiplication". Or is it the other
> way around? Please clarify.
Hi Jaroslav,
thank you for your quick answer. It was this one (8379) that I meant, you're right:
http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/ad8ed668e0a4
Now I've to say that I learned something new. I always do
hg update -C
where '-C' stands for "-C --clean overwrite locally modified files". I took
8380 from my local machine repository but commited something else before locally
(that's why I was talking about my local 8380 but meant savannah 8379).
What I would expect if I do 'hg update -C' is that 8375 in my local repository
is thrown to nirvana - but it's still there. Now I've got another question,
which hg subcommand must I take to completely overwrite all my changes with the
savannah sources? Is there any subcommand, or must I always clone a repository
to get the original files?
> Did you rerun ./autogen.sh to regenerate the configure scripts? That
> is probably necessary, because the old definition
> of macro OCTAVE_LOCAL_BUFFER was directly in config.h.
Twice a year I forget about 'autogen.sh'. This time I did forget about it, too.
I also cloned the savannah repository and created a new one on my computer. Then
the problem disappeared.
> In any case OCTAVE_LOCAL_BUFFER now *should* work with bools (as
> opposed to the old one), therefore your patch is not the right way to
> do (unless we become really desperate).
Yes right.
> If the answer to the above question is yes, please check for
> HAVE_DYNAMIC_AUTO_ARRAYS in config.h.
My lines in config.h look like
/* Define if C++ supports dynamic auto arrays */
#define HAVE_DYNAMIC_AUTO_ARRAYS 1
No need to set it '0', right?
> If it's defined, please try disabling it and compile again (will
> recompile just about everything apart from libcruft, unfortunately). I
> suspect that dynamic stack arrays can be buggy with some compilers.
> What's your compiler, anyway?
A self made f2c/fort77 combination together with gcc/g++ 4.0.1.
Sorry for the noise, thanks for your tips and best regards,
Thomas
More information about the Octave-maintainers
mailing list