Re: 4.4c, second endeavor

[email protected] Mon, 29 Nov 2021 07:06:10 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.lisp.scheme.bigloo
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Hi Sven,

> Manuel wrote, 2021-11-26 15:35:
> > Thanks to those who have sent early reports. I have fixed the JVM and
> > Bignum problems
> 
> The bignum fix works, but the build process stops later on
> (tested only for x32):
> 
> gccx32  -I/var/tmp/bigloo/lib/bigloo/4.4c -O2 -fcf-protection=none -fno-stack-protector -fno-strict-aliasing -msse2 -mfpmath=sse -Wno-unused-value -Wno-parentheses-equality -Wno-parentheses -Wno-invalid-source-encoding -Wno-return-type -Wno-trigraphs -fPIC  -I/var/tmp/bigloo/gc/gc-8.0.4/include -c -o Unsafe-bignumber.o objs/obj_u/Unsafe/bignumber.c && \
>         mv Unsafe-bignumber.o objs/obj_u/Unsafe/bignumber.o
> objs/obj_u/Unsafe/bignumber.c:5108:25: error: redefinition of ‘bgl_bignum_mul’
>  5108 |  BGL_EXPORTED_DEF obj_t bgl_bignum_mul(obj_t BgL_xz00_63, obj_t BgL_yz00_64)
>       |                         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> objs/obj_u/Unsafe/bignumber.c:4666:25: note: previous definition of ‘bgl_bignum_mul’ was here
>  4666 |  BGL_EXPORTED_DEF obj_t bgl_bignum_mul(obj_t BgL_xz00_60, obj_t BgL_yz00_61)
>       |                         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is a typo. The second bgl_bignum_mul should have been bgl_bignum_exp.
Thanks for that report. I upload a new tarball at once.

-- 
Manuel

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 487 B)