stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: XLC++ build failures
Date Fri, 16 May 2008 15:19:59 GMT
Eric Lemings wrote:
>  
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 1:51 PM
>> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
>> Subject: XLC++ build failures (was: Re: official location for 
>> stdcxx build results)
>>
>> Eric Lemings wrote:
>>>  
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of 
>> Martin Sebor
>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 10:54 AM
>>>> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: official location for stdcxx build results
>>>>
>>>> Eric Lemings wrote:
>>>>>  
>>>>> Was just looking at this page:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://stdcxx.apache.org/builds/4.2.x/aix-5.3-ppc-vacpp-9.0.html
>>>>>
>>>>> I assume this page was not generated correctly.  Something 
>>>> still amiss?
>>>>
>>>> The page is fine (the presentation could be better), but there
>>>> is a problem with all the AIX builds. They've all been failing
>>>> due to undefined library symbols. I've been assuming it had to
>>>> do with all the recent infrastructure screwups that Scott noted
>>>> the other day but upon closer inspection I noticed that we're
>>>> using -qtempinc when we should be using -qtemplateregistry. I
>>>> wonder if this change might be responsible:
>>>>    http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=652954
>>> Uh yeah, quite possible.  The build directory, but not necessarily
>>> the source directory, by definition has to be writable.  I assume
>>> that's where configuration tests are built and executed also,
>>> unless I'm missing something.
>> Most but not all of them. The change above is to code that runs
>> with CWD=$TOPDIR. My local builds run fine so I'm puzzled as to
>> why it's failing. Travis, any ideas?
> 
> If the script continues processing, shouldn't the script change back
> to the original directory after its done?  Or does it just exit?

Shell commands invoked from a makefile are executed in their
own shell so they have no effect on the environment of the
invoking process. It's easy to see in a simple little
makefile:

     $ cat mf && make -f mf foo bar
     foo:
             pwd && cd .. && pwd

     bar:
             pwd

             pwd && cd .. && pwd
     /tmp
     /
             pwd
     /tmp

Martin

Mime
View raw message