[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Building 32-bit chicken scheme on OS X
From: |
Jim Ursetto |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Building 32-bit chicken scheme on OS X |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Jul 2013 18:21:26 -0500 |
I put the tarball here:
http://3e8.org/pub/chicken/stability-tmp/chicken-4.8.0.3-b39ebad.tar.gz
On Jul 15, 2013, at 5:56 PM, Jim Ursetto <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi there.
>
> The culprit appears to be a bug in our use of sigsetjmp, which is actually
> already fixed in recent stability/4.8.0 (after 4.8.0.3) but is as yet
> unreleased. I verified 32-bit builds now work on a 64-bit Mac.
>
> If anyone has a 32-bit Mac (for example, an original Core Duo) could you
> verify it works on your system as well? You will need to build
> stability/4.8.0 from git, or I can make a tarball if you aren't set up to
> build from git.
>
> Jim
>
> (P.S. On a 32-bit system it is redundant to add any options like ARCH or
> *_OPTIONS; `make PLATFORM=macosx` will suffice.)
>
> On Jan 11, 2013, at 2:21 AM, Daniel P. Wright <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Jim Ursetto (Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:20:05PM -0600) >>
>>> Dani,
>>>
>>> ASSEMBLER_OPTIONS is missing:
>>>
>>> make PLATFORM=macosx ARCH=x86 C_COMPILER_OPTIONS="-no-cpp-precomp
>>> -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv -fno-common -DHAVE_CHICKEN_CONFIG_H -m32"
>>> ASSEMBLER_OPTIONS="-m32" LINKER_OPTIONS="-m32"
>>
>> Seems obvious now you mention it! Thanks, I also managed to build
>> successfully with these build options. But,
>>
>>> The resulting chicken gives me a bus error though and I don't know how to
>>> fix that.
>>
>> Me too.
>>
>> I have had the same bus error when building chicken on an old os x
>> machine without specifying ARCH=x86-64, which I think was defaulting to
>> a 32-bit build. Perhaps 32-bit builds just don't play nicely on 64-bit
>> macs? I don't suppose it's a common use-case.
>>
>> Thanks for your input! I guess I'll look into it a little further and
>> see if I can get anywhere with it. What is a bus error?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dani.
>