similar to: make check errors for R-2.3.1

Hello all, I have loading problem with XML_1.9 under 64 bit R2.3.1, which I got from http://R.research.att.com/. XML_1.9 works fine under 32 bit R2.5.0. I thought that could be installation problem, and I tried install.packages or biocLite, every time the package installed fine, except some warning messages below: ld64 warning: in /usr/lib/libxml2.dylib, file does not contain requested

I am getting assembler errors on clang-llvm-2.9 output for a program with exceptions that I do not get when using the installed g++ Mac OS-X 10.4 powerpc-apple-darwin > as -version Apple Computer, Inc. version cctools-590.23.2.obj~17, GNU assembler version 1.38 the folks at gnu-binutils assure me this is an assembler bug, but also that this isn't a recognizable "gnu"

Hello. I wrote a package (that contains C source) that I've been compiling and running on both Linux and Windows for about a year. However, that same source package fails to compile on MacOS (10.4.11, PowerPC G4, Xcode installed, gcc version 4.0.1, make version 3.80, ld version cctools-590.23.2.obj~17). There is nothing platform-specific in the code-- just numerical functions that I

Hello All, I tried to install RMySQL package, but the error messages says there is no such package, even though I did see RMySQL is there in the contributed package list in all mirror sites of CRAN I tried. Not sure what is the problem. > mysql.home <- '/usr/local/mysql' >

I believe it's a feature missing in MC - https://github.com/opensource-apple/cctools/blob/4da58fd2fc026317ed9e9ef1feabf21ed0bb7a81/cctools-836/as/i386.c line 539 adds support for the .bss directive if certain variables are defined, and mainline gas supports it on all ARM targets: https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs/as/ARM-Directives.html . Supporting the directive on all Darwin targets could

Hey everyone! Recently there has been some progress on LLVM-based tools for manipulating MachO binaries: llvm-objcopy has been gaining a lot of important bits to support MachO (it's relatively close to the point where one can implement the strip-like functionality), llvm-lipo is functional and supports most of cctools' lipo options (https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/llvm-lipo.html). There

Thanks for your response, that's kinda what I've gathered over the years. I was hoping that the Xcode project would have "just worked". I'll keep piece-mealing it together, and hope that it works. I'll try to post a radar. Joe Joe Abbey Director of S/W Development Arxan Technologies, Inc. 1305 Cumberland Ave, Ste 215 West Lafayette, IN 47906 W: 765-889-4756 x2 C:

LGTM On 29 September 2013 06:08, Nicholas White <n.j.white at gmail.com> wrote: > I believe it's a feature missing in MC - > https://github.com/opensource-apple/cctools/blob/4da58fd2fc026317ed9e9ef1feabf21ed0bb7a81/cctools-836/as/i386.c > line 539 adds support for the .bss directive if certain variables are > defined, and mainline gas supports it on all ARM targets: >

On 14.01.2012, at 17:23, Joe Abbey wrote: > I have a need to build ld from source to understand an assert(0). > > I got excited when I found that ld64 on the opensource portal contains an xcodeproj > > http://opensource.apple.com/source/ld64/ld64-127.2/ > > But... it seems like I'm lacking mach-o/arm/reloc.h, and dyld_priv.h. > > I'm doing my best to stitch

*bitcode_strip* is a utility which is used to manipulate (leave / remove) bitcode segments in a Mach-O file. It is a part of Apple’s cctools and it is also distributed with Xcode. The man page of the tool is available here https://www.manpagez.com/man/1/bitcode_strip/. The functionality of *bitcode_strip* naturally maps onto llvm-objcopy’s model and requires only minimal additions to it.

Hey Michael, I completely agree that setting the rpath properly the first time around is much preferred. But, changes to the binary, particularly during development is much quicker. Prebuilt libraries which are being repackaged is one use case that is missed. In the past, I’ve even used it to repair am incorrectly built library which was missing the library name. There are a few different

Is this an extension to what cctools' assembler provides or a missing feature in MC? On 28 September 2013 18:48, Nicholas White <n.j.white at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi - I've attached a patch to make the assembly parser recognise the > .bss directive on Darwin targets as a switch to the (__DATA,__bss) > section. The ELF & COFF assembly parsers already recongnise the .bss

I'm having some trouble getting llvm-gcc4 to compile. It's unable to compile darwin-crt3.c. It's mentioning "Complex expression. Absolute segment assumed." but I'm not sure if that's a real error message. Has anyone run into this before? I'm running on a G4 apple 10.4.8, kernel version 8.6.0. I googled around and found a bug with the same error message:

Hi Kent, My guess is you are getting some new bit of info in your object files and your ranlib(1) is older and doesn't know about it. If you can send me the .o file or the output of otool(1) with the -hlv options on your object file I can take a look. Kev P.S. you can find out the version of ranlib(1) you have by running strings(1) on it and grep(1)'ing for the string

Hi Bill, I have "version 1" backgroundrb running on my development server with rails 1.2.1, with no issues (other than the left over DB connections blocking up my MySQL server, which isn''t exactly a new problem). Going to move production servers to rails 1.2.1 very soon, I''ll post back if there''s any trouble. Still would *really* like to get version

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:17:32PM -0500, David Fang wrote: >>> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also >>> comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here: >>> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363 >>> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46 bootstrap.) >>> This consistency between

>> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also >> comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here: >> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363 >> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46 bootstrap.) >> This consistency between different bootstraps of the release gives me >> some hope that g++-4.0.1 is

Hi all, building current llvm-gcc-4.0 TOT(Revision: 42128) with current llvm (Revision: 42128) on 8.10.1 Darwin (x86) fails with the following message. Is that a just a temporary inconsistency or should i file a bug? /Users/arnold/Desktop/testing/vanilla-gcc-4.0/obj/gcc/xgcc -B/Users/ arnold/Desktop/testing/vanilla-gcc-4.0/obj/gcc/ -B/Users/arnold/

Hey everyone! Objcopy is a powerful tool that allows one to modify object files in various manners, for example, modify symbols / symbol tables or copy / remove particular parts of a binary. It also serves as a basis for the strip tool. Currently, llvm-objcopy only supports ELF files while binutils' objcopy can handle Mach-O files as well. Besides extending the existing tool to support Mach-O

On 19 Sep 2007, at 21:51, Dale Johannesen wrote: >> will disable multilib (./configure --disable-multilib ...) and try >> again and post the results > > Yeah, that should work. Indeed it did. llvm-gcc now builds fine. (llvm and llvm-gcc at Revision: 42148) haven't run the test-suite or test yet - need sleep - good night my configure flags in case anyone wonders: