[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscall
From: |
Rik |
Subject: |
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst |
Date: |
Sun, 17 Nov 2013 19:13:47 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/25.0 |
Update of bug #40606 (project octave):
Status: None => In Progress
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #6:
I think the %!test code has simply been too naive in assuming that on a PC
platform the sort routine will be that provided by Microsoft. It might, or it
might not be, and this could depend entirely on the local setup. In my case,
I have a third variant in that I have manually installed a number of GNU utils
using downloadable installers. So I don't have MinGW installed, and we could
remove sort.exe from <OCTAVE_HOME>/bin, and yet I would still be getting a
UNIX-like sort program on the command line.
This is pretty easy to test for. I tried
status = system ("sort.exe --help");
which returns a non-zero value when sort is the Microsoft version.
Alternatively,
status = system ("sort.exe /?");
will return a non-zero value when sort is a UNIX-like version. It's only a
single %!test so it might look kind of ugly to check the sort routine, but
there isn't any performance penalty. What do you think?
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?40606>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, John Donoghue, 2013/11/16
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Rik, 2013/11/17
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Philip Nienhuis, 2013/11/17
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, John Donoghue, 2013/11/17
- Message not available
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Philip Nienhuis, 2013/11/17
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst,
Rik <=
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Rik, 2013/11/18
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Michael Goffioul, 2013/11/25
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Rik, 2013/11/26
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Michael Goffioul, 2013/11/26
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Rik, 2013/11/26
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Michael Goffioul, 2013/11/26
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Rik, 2013/11/26
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Michael Goffioul, 2013/11/26
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, John Donoghue, 2013/11/26
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #40606] mxe-octave built octave: fails syscalls.cc-tst, Rik, 2013/11/26