This time I got it, It took me some time but for the very first time
it wasn't a waste of time. :-)
On 1/31/06, Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 07:22:58PM +0100, LEGO wrote:
> > - I had to do some changes to get it work (and good news, I finally
> > grasped something about autofoo's mechanics).
>
> :-)
>
> > I'll attach the current version of the lua autofoo pacth, It some
> > trivial fixes and some more checks.
>
> Only some general comments on the patch about things I noticed when I
> diffed my diff against yours:
>
> - Interesting, how many mistakes I managed to put into the patch...
> and it even compiled on my system (with lua).
It appears that the harder is to find an error the more problems it causes.
> - Please use real TABS in acinclude and configure patches. Your current
> patch just breaks indentation in these files when used with the only
> standard tabwidth (8). Using Spaces instead of TABs is not even allowed
> at the beginning of lines of makefiles (it will break on older make
> implementations). That's why I changed the whitespace in the Makefile.am
> (which you kept in your version of the patch - it's just a general
> remark).
I'm aware of this, It had made me loose hours in the past. But AFAIK
what comes after \\\n ( backslash - line end ) is just appended to the
same line as if the \\n were not there. In the specific case the
resulting macro is even used as precondition so it didin't cause any
problems... (in the action the lines must start with a tab even for
the "recent" make I have).
I changed the anyway! :)
> - I'm not really sure that you really need to check as thoroughly as you
> currently do - if someone has a partial/invalid installation of lua,
> they just might fail and fix their installation ;) - but that's a matter
> of taste. What I don't like ist the check for the exact version. That's
> not the spirit of autofoo: We check for the availablility of
> features/functions, not versions. Are you sure your code won't work with
> lua 5.0.1 or 5.0 or 4.x? What happens when 5.0.3 is released? How about
> skipping that check for now and wait for break reports?
I removed the check. (btw I do not thinkl 5.0.4 is going to be
released. They are working on 5.1 for which I'll need to test for, as
I do not believe the existing code is going to work as it is. As soon
as they come out from beta I'll get into that.
> > Can you test it and tell me whether the built binary actually works?
>
> It dowsn't even build on my system: It looks like the addition of lualib
> added some depenency on -lm or something like this...
>
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `log'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `sqrt'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `fmod'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `cos'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `sin'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `atan2'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `pow'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `log10'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `exp'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `tan'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `atan'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `asin'
> /usr/lib/liblualib.so: undefined reference to `acos'
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> Also, I don't have any sample testcode, or how was I to check whether it
> actually works?
print( "hello world! :-) ") -- should be enough!
> Good night
> Joerg
> --
> Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
> We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
> works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ethereal-dev mailing list
> Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
>
--
This information is top security. When you have read it, destroy yourself.
-- Marshall McLuhan
