Opened 12 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
#37424 closed update (fixed)
xalanc: update to 1.11
Reported by: | mathew@… | Owned by: | mww@… |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | ports | Version: | |
Keywords: | haspatch | Cc: | cooljeanius (Eric Gallager), kurthindenburg (Kurt Hindenburg) |
Port: | xalanc |
Description
Xalan 1.11 was released in Oct 2012. Here is a patch file for the Portfile to build v1.11.
Attachments (2)
Change History (11)
Changed 12 years ago by mathew@…
comment:1 Changed 12 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)
comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)
Owner: | changed from macports-tickets@… to mww@… |
---|---|
Version: | 2.1.2 |
comment:3 Changed 12 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
- Please don't patch the Id line.
- The revision should reset to 0 (the default) when the version increases.
- Using an md5 checksum by itself should be considered deprecated. Using it in combination with another checksum type is OK if upstream publishes the md5. Looks like only a gpg signature is provided for xalan-c though, so after verifying the signature, you can just generate e.g. rmd160 and sha256 checksums to use in the portfile.
- What's the problem with clang? We'd much prefer to fix problems compiling with clang instead of blacklisting it, since it is the default compiler on OS X and the alternatives are getting more and more outdated.
- Please don't add trailing whitespace.
comment:4 follow-up: 5 Changed 12 years ago by mathew@…
Thanks for the corrections... I don't generally make these, but had to update internally, so I thought I'd share the resulting Portfile.
- Please don't patch the Id line.
Fixed.
- The revision should reset to 0 (the default) when the version increases.
Fixed
- Using an md5 checksum by itself should be considered deprecated....
Verified signature and generated additional checksums
- What's the problem with clang?
There are no obvious problems with clang; Xalan builds just fine. Unfortunately, the resulting binary segfaults on a null pointer... presumably this is a compiler bug?
- Please don't add trailing whitespace.
Fixed
Changed 12 years ago by mathew@…
Attachment: | Portfile.patch added |
---|
comment:5 Changed 12 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
Keywords: | haspatch added |
---|---|
Summary: | Update Xalan to v1.11 → xalanc: update to 1.11 |
Replying to mathew@…:
- What's the problem with clang?
There are no obvious problems with clang; Xalan builds just fine. Unfortunately, the resulting binary segfaults on a null pointer... presumably this is a compiler bug?
In that case, could you file a bug report against clang, and add a comment above the "compiler.blacklist clang" line with a link to that bug report, so that we can keep an eye on it?
What version of clang are you using? (clang -v
) Have you tried any other versions?
comment:6 Changed 12 years ago by gallafent
I patched the portfile using the Portfile.patch attached to this bug. I then removed the blacklisting of clang and built the port. The resulting executable runs successfully for my small testcase, no segfault.
My version of clang is (I think) current:
Apple LLVM version 4.2 (clang-425.0.28) (based on LLVM 3.2svn) Target: x86_64-apple-darwin11.4.2 Thread model: posix
This is running on:
Darwin Humber.local 11.4.2 Darwin Kernel Version 11.4.2: Thu Aug 23 16:26:45 PDT 2012; root:xnu-1699.32.7~1/RELEASE_I386 i386
(32-bit kernel since it's old hardware: I'm building for 64-bit:
/opt/local/bin/Xalan: Mach-O 64-bit x86_64 executable
)
I haven't done any more thorough testing ( http://xalan.apache.org/old/xalan-j/test/run.html#how-to-run-c appears both complex and outdated), but the simple smoketest I ran worked OK for me.
I therefore suggest that this portfile patch be applied but without blacklisting clang.
If there's an example test which generates a segfault for somebody else, I'd be interested to try that here with the version I built!
Definitely a good plan to get Xalan-C to version 1.11 though, 1.10 is very outdated!
comment:9 Changed 9 years ago by kurthindenburg (Kurt Hindenburg)
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
done r142268
Please attach a unified diff of the portfile so we can see your changes.
In the future, please Cc the port maintainer(s).