GNU bug report logs - #12841
Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol .rpl_malloc

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 12841 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 12841 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
Subject: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol .rpl_malloc
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:38:02 +0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

root <at> x104:[/data/prj/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-8.20]export
FORCE_UNSAFE_CONFIGURE=1
root <at> x104:[/data/prj/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-8.20]CFLAGS=-O2 -qcpluscmt
./configure \
        --prefix=/opt \
        --sysconfdir=/var/coreutils/etc \
        --sharedstatedir=/var/coreutils/com \
        --localstatedir=/var/coreutils \
        --mandir=/usr/share/man  \
                > build/aix/configure.out
configure: WARNING: libattr development library was not found or not usable.
configure: WARNING: GNU coreutils will be built without xattr support.
configure: WARNING: libcap library was not found or not usable.
configure: WARNING: GNU coreutils will be built without capability support.
configure: WARNING: libgmp development library was not found or not usable.
configure: WARNING: GNU coreutils will be built without GMP support.
+ make > build/aix/make.out
ld: 0711-317 ERROR: Undefined symbol: .rpl_malloc
ld: 0711-345 Use the -bloadmap or -bnoquiet option to obtain more
information.
make: *** [src/make-prime-list] Error 8
+ make install DESTDIR=/var/tmp/root/coreutils-8.20.0.0 >
build/aix/install.out
ld: 0711-317 ERROR: Undefined symbol: .rpl_malloc
ld: 0711-345 Use the -bloadmap or -bnoquiet option to obtain more
information.
make: *** [src/make-prime-list] Error 8
make install returned an error
root <at> x104:[/data/prj/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-8.20]
root <at> x104:[/data/prj/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-8.20]
root <at> x104:[/data/prj/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-8.20]

Version 8.15 is the last one I packaged, and build went fine.

I have also tested the build of 8.17. This completed (make install) without
any noteable errors.

p.s. Thought I had submitted this days ago - but it has been sitting in my
Drafts folder. :(

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #8 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 01:30:23 -0800

On 11/08/2012 08:38 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
> ld: 0711-317 ERROR: Undefined symbol: .rpl_malloc

Thanks for the bug report.

Which command generated this diagnostic?
Build with "make V=1" to see.

Come to think if it, it'd be helpful if you
did a "make clean" followed by "make V=1"
and sent us the output of that.

Message #11 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
To: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 21:20:31 +0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Working on what you requested. Last bit I have in a file is:
...
  GEN    lib/wctype.h
  CC     src/make-prime-list.o
  CCLD   src/make-prime-list


On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> On 11/08/2012 08:38 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
> > ld: 0711-317 ERROR: Undefined symbol: .rpl_malloc
>
> Thanks for the bug report.
>
> Which command generated this diagnostic?
> Build with "make V=1" to see.
>
> Come to think if it, it'd be helpful if you
> did a "make clean" followed by "make V=1"
> and sent us the output of that.
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #14 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
To: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 21:33:42 +0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

nohup.out attached.



On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> On 11/08/2012 08:38 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
> > ld: 0711-317 ERROR: Undefined symbol: .rpl_malloc
>
> Thanks for the bug report.
>
> Which command generated this diagnostic?
> Build with "make V=1" to see.
>
> Come to think if it, it'd be helpful if you
> did a "make clean" followed by "make V=1"
> and sent us the output of that.
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[nohup.out (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #17 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 23:41:47 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I think you can fix the bug by adding "#undef malloc"
to the list of undefs in src/make-prime-list.c.  You might
want to give that a try.  But this business with the primes
has bitten us before, and I'd like to install the attached
more-ambitious patch instead, which you might also like to
try.  Most of this patch is a table of primes.

[primes.txt.gz (application/x-gzip, attachment)]

Message #22 received at 12841-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>, 12841-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:04:39 +0000

On 11/11/2012 07:41 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I think you can fix the bug by adding "#undef malloc"
> to the list of undefs in src/make-prime-list.c.  You might
> want to give that a try.  But this business with the primes
> has bitten us before, and I'd like to install the attached
> more-ambitious patch instead, which you might also like to
> try.  Most of this patch is a table of primes.

Thanks for that.

I notice that src/make-prime-list is made even if src/primes.h
is present, is that intentional?

Also for my own reference, after a `make maintainer-clean`,
make-prime-list will best be generated with -Dwide_uint=__'unsigned __int128'

cheers,
Pádraig.

Message #25 received at 12841-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
Cc: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>, 12841-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 11:04:03 -0800

On 11/11/2012 07:04 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> I notice that src/make-prime-list is made even if src/primes.h
> is present, is that intentional?

No, but I don't know offhand how to turn that off (this
is a bit of an automake corner, alas).

Message #28 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, P <at> draigBrady.com, mamfelt <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 12:07:27 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 11/11/2012 07:04 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Also for my own reference, after a `make maintainer-clean`,
> make-prime-list will best be generated with -Dwide_uint=__'unsigned __int128'

Attached is a combined revised patch that attempts to automate that part.
Doing this properly would require a configure-time test for
__int128, which is probably overkill (would affect all builds,
whereas this is just needed occasionally).

This patch also shrinks primes.h somewhat by having the target
compiler do more of the work.

[patch.txt.gz (application/x-gzip, attachment)]

Message #31 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:34:42 -0800

On 11/11/2012 11:50 AM, Michael Felt wrote:
> FYI - the undef worked, make check completes

Thanks, I've installed that patch.  I also installed
the more-ambitious one.

Message #34 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 05:12:49 +0100

Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 11:50 AM, Michael Felt wrote:
>> FYI - the undef worked, make check completes
>
> Thanks, I've installed that patch.  I also installed
> the more-ambitious one.

Thanks for addressing those problems.
Did you intend to commit the generated primes.h?
I noticed that right away because its longer-than-80 lines
are provoking "make distcheck" failure.

More fundamentally, I'd prefer not to version-control
generated files, unless absolutely necessary.

Message #37 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:19:39 -0800

On 11/12/2012 08:12 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Thanks for addressing those problems.
> Did you intend to commit the generated primes.h?

I did, but I see now that I was mistaken.  Thanks for
catching that.

I pushed the following further change, to fix it.  A downside
is that whoever generates primes.h for distribution should,
as a nicety, do so on a host that supports 128-bit int,
e.g., GCC 4.6 or later on x86-64 (but not x86).  If you forget
it's no big deal, as 64 bits is enough for now.

This patch should also fix the lines-too-long problem at
least until we have hosts with 1024-bit integers, at which
point we'll have to reformat primes.h again.

This email omits the part of the patch that deletes
primes.h, as that part's pretty boring.

From e4a0c995070c92d678fdf766da4a0460990aebe4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:10:17 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] factor: improve primes.h change

This follows suggestions by Jim Meyering in
<http://bugs.gnu.org/12841#34>.
* src/make-prime-list.c (print_wide_uint): Change "nested" argument
to "nesting", and use it to avoid outputting lines that are too long.
* src/primes.h: Remove from git.  This can be generated by a
maintainer.  It's nicer to do so on a host with at least 128-bit
arithmetic.
---
 src/make-prime-list.c |   14 +-
 src/primes.h          | 2010 -------------------------------------------------
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2016 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 src/primes.h

diff --git a/src/make-prime-list.c b/src/make-prime-list.c
index ab0352e..5a222d9 100644
--- a/src/make-prime-list.c
+++ b/src/make-prime-list.c
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ process_prime (struct prime *info, unsigned p)
 }
 
 static void
-print_wide_uint (wide_uint n, int nested, unsigned wide_uint_bits)
+print_wide_uint (wide_uint n, int nesting, unsigned wide_uint_bits)
 {
   /* Number of bits per integer literal.  8 is too many, because
      uintmax_t is 32 bits on some machines so we cannot shift by 32 bits.
@@ -91,10 +91,12 @@ print_wide_uint (wide_uint n, int nested, unsigned wide_uint_bits)
       int needs_parentheses = n >> bits_per_literal >> bits_per_literal != 0;
       if (needs_parentheses)
         printf ("(");
-      print_wide_uint (n >> bits_per_literal, 1, wide_uint_bits);
-      printf (") << %d | " + !needs_parentheses, bits_per_literal);
+      print_wide_uint (n >> bits_per_literal, nesting + 1, wide_uint_bits);
+      if (needs_parentheses)
+        printf (")\n%*s", nesting + 3, "");
+      printf (" << %d | ", bits_per_literal);
     }
-  else if (nested)
+  else if (nesting)
     {
       printf ("(uintmax_t) ");
       hex_digits_per_literal
@@ -127,9 +129,9 @@ output_primes (const struct prime *primes, unsigned nprimes)
       unsigned int d8 = i + 8 < nprimes ? primes[i + 8].p - primes[i].p : 0xff;
       if (255 < d8) /* this happens at 668221 */
         abort ();
-      printf ("P (%u, %u,\n   ", primes[i].p - p, d8);
+      printf ("P (%u, %u,\n   (", primes[i].p - p, d8);
       print_wide_uint (primes[i].pinv, 0, wide_uint_bits);
-      printf (",\n   UINTMAX_MAX / %d)\n", primes[i].p);
+      printf ("),\n   UINTMAX_MAX / %d)\n", primes[i].p);
       p = primes[i].p;
     }
 
diff --git a/src/primes.h b/src/primes.h
deleted file mode 100644
index a47d5ce..0000000
--- a/src/primes.h
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,2010 +0,0 @@
-/* Generated file -- DO NOT EDIT */
-
-#define WIDE_UINT_BITS 128
... rest of patch omitted as being too boring ...

Message #40 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 06:40:54 +0100

Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 08:12 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Thanks for addressing those problems.
>> Did you intend to commit the generated primes.h?
>
> I did, but I see now that I was mistaken.  Thanks for
> catching that.
>
> I pushed the following further change, to fix it.  A downside
> is that whoever generates primes.h for distribution should,
> as a nicety, do so on a host that supports 128-bit int,
> e.g., GCC 4.6 or later on x86-64 (but not x86).  If you forget
> it's no big deal, as 64 bits is enough for now.
>
> This patch should also fix the lines-too-long problem at
> least until we have hosts with 1024-bit integers, at which
> point we'll have to reformat primes.h again.
>
> This email omits the part of the patch that deletes
> primes.h, as that part's pretty boring.
>
>>From e4a0c995070c92d678fdf766da4a0460990aebe4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:10:17 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH] factor: improve primes.h change
>
> This follows suggestions by Jim Meyering in
> <http://bugs.gnu.org/12841#34>.
> * src/make-prime-list.c (print_wide_uint): Change "nested" argument
> to "nesting", and use it to avoid outputting lines that are too long.
> * src/primes.h: Remove from git.  This can be generated by a
> maintainer.  It's nicer to do so on a host with at least 128-bit
> arithmetic.

Thanks for the quick fix!
For the record, the 80-byte line-length maximum applies
only to VC'd files.

Message #43 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Bernhard Voelker <mail <at> bernhard-voelker.de>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>,
	Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:00:44 +0100

On 11/13/2012 06:19 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I pushed the following further change, to fix it.

Something seems to be not quite correct:

  $ make clean all
  [...]
    CC       src/factor.o
  src/factor.c:679:1: error: 'WIDE_UINT_BITS' undeclared here (not in a function)
  src/factor.c:679:1: error: expression in static assertion is not an integer

  $ head -n4 src/primes.h
  /* Generated file -- DO NOT EDIT */

  P ( 1,  26, 0xaaaaaaaaaaaaaaabUL, 0x5555555555555555UL) /* 3 */
  P ( 2,  26, 0xcccccccccccccccdUL, 0x3333333333333333UL) /* 5 */

  $ make src/primes.h
  make: `src/primes.h' is up to date.

  $ rm src/primes.h
  rm: remove write-protected regular file `src/primes.h'? y

  $ make src/primes.h
  make src/make-prime-list
    GEN      src/primes.h

  $ head -n3 src/primes.h
  /* Generated file -- DO NOT EDIT */

  #define WIDE_UINT_BITS 128

I'm not sure, but shouldn't the prime list src/primes.h depend
on src/make-prime-list?

Furthermore, shouldn't src/primes.h be included in .gitignore?

Have a nice day,
Berny

Message #46 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Bernhard Voelker <mail <at> bernhard-voelker.de>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>,
	Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:46:35 -0800

On 11/12/2012 11:00 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> I'm not sure, but shouldn't the prime list src/primes.h depend
> on src/make-prime-list?

I'd rather not do that, since that would mean every builder
would have to build src/primes.h, and I'd rather that people used
the one that's in the tarball, as this avoids a build step
where things might go wrong (as they did in your case).

Your problem arose because you have leftover files from an
older git revision.  To fix it, remove src/primes.h and
then rebuild.

> Furthermore, shouldn't src/primes.h be included in .gitignore?

Right you are.  I pushed this:

From be3f34ff34c6b34adf86eeb5e21dd7b86fdbe58f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:43:08 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] factor: cleanup for primes.h

* .gitignore: Add src/primes.h back, since it's no longer
in the repository.
---
 .gitignore | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 2ac6e45..5ce2361 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -154,6 +154,7 @@
 /po/stamp-po
 /src/cu-progs.mk
 /src/make-prime-list
+/src/primes.h
 /src/version.c
 /src/version.h
 /stamp-h1
-- 
1.7.11.7

Message #49 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Bernhard Voelker <mail <at> bernhard-voelker.de>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>,
	Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:47:49 -0800

Oops, sorry Bernhard, I confused you with
Michael Felt, so the "in your case" in my
previous message was wrong -- it should have
been "in Michael Felt's case".

Message #52 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Bernhard Voelker <mail <at> bernhard-voelker.de>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>,
	Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 17:15:14 +0100

On 11/13/2012 04:46 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 11:00 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> I'm not sure, but shouldn't the prime list src/primes.h depend
>> on src/make-prime-list?
>
> I'd rather not do that, since that would mean every builder
> would have to build src/primes.h, and I'd rather that people used
> the one that's in the tarball, as this avoids a build step
> where things might go wrong (as they did in your case).

Thanks.

That's an argument for having src/primes.h in Git. ;-)

BTW: in which case will that file change? I mean, prime
number are quite static, aren't they?

Have a nice day,
Berny

Message #55 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>
To: Bernhard Voelker <mail <at> bernhard-voelker.de>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>,
	Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>, Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:45:05 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 11/13/2012 09:15 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 04:46 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> On 11/12/2012 11:00 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>>> I'm not sure, but shouldn't the prime list src/primes.h depend
>>> on src/make-prime-list?
>>
>> I'd rather not do that, since that would mean every builder
>> would have to build src/primes.h, and I'd rather that people used
>> the one that's in the tarball, as this avoids a build step
>> where things might go wrong (as they did in your case).
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> That's an argument for having src/primes.h in Git. ;-)

Not necessarily.  We can still keep src/primes.h out of git, as long as
'make dist' is only run under two conditions: either from a git checkout
with a machine sufficiently powerful to generate the same src/primes.h,
or from a tarball where src/primes.h already exists in the tarball.  It
excludes running 'make dist' from a git checkout with inferior setups,
but that is not a common enough operation to worry about.

> BTW: in which case will that file change? I mean, prime
> number are quite static, aren't they?

Again, since the file is unlikely to ever differ when generated
correctly, then there is no need to store it in git.

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake <at> redhat.com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #58 received at 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Bernhard Voelker <mail <at> bernhard-voelker.de>
Cc: 12841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Felt <mamfelt <at> gmail.com>,
	Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Subject: Re: bug#12841: Make for AIX 8.20 fails with undefined symbol
	.rpl_malloc
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:38:43 -0800

On 11/13/2012 08:15 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> in which case will that file change? I mean, prime
> number are quite static, aren't they?

:-)  The file will change once we get practical
machines with unsigned integers wider than 128 bits.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.