This web mail archive is frozen.
This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.
You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails
have been added to it since July of 2016.
Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.
Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Erm -- that's weird. So when you extract the tarballs,
> atomic-amd64-linux.s is non-empty (as it should be), but after a
> failed build, it's file length 0?
> Notice that during the build process, we sym link atomic-amd64-linux.s
> to atomic-asm.S (I see that happening in your build output as well).
> So if the compiler is barfing when compiling atomic-asm.S, perhaps
> it's also wiping out the file...? That would be darn weird, though...
Hmm. Not a solution to the original problem, but might I suggest that
any case where the build might over-write a source file is a serious
problem. Two possible ways come to mind to address that:
1) Either the configure or make process might write-protect the source
file at some time prior to making the symlink.
2) The make process could copy, rather than symlink, the file (w/ a
dependency that would trigger a re-copy if the source file is updated).
The write-protect approach has the advantage that it would let us see a
make failure at the point that something is trying (erroneously) to
write/truncate the file.
Paul H. Hargrove PHHargrove_at_[hidden]
Future Technologies Group Tel: +1-510-495-2352
HPC Research Department Fax: +1-510-486-6900
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory