The configure script reports this error: checking system version (for dynamic loading)... ./configure: line 9533: syntax error near unexpected token `ac_space=' '' ./configure: line 9533: ` case `(ac_space=' '; set | grep ac_space) 2>&1` in *ac_space=\ *)' The syntax looks OK to me, but I could be wrong on that. I can't find any syntax errors leading up to these lines: # The following way of writing the cache mishandles newlines in values, # but we know of no workaround that is simple, portable, and efficient. # So, don't put newlines in cache variables' values. # Ultrix sh set writes to stderr and can't be redirected directly, # and sets the high bit in the cache file unless we assign to the vars. { (set) 2>&1 | case `(ac_space=' '; set | grep ac_space) 2>&1` in *ac_space=\ *) # `set' does not quote correctly, so add quotes (double-quote) # substitution turns \\\\ into \\, and sed turns \\ into \). sed -n \ "s/'/'\\\\''/g; s/^\\([_$as_cr_alnum]*_cv_[_$as_cr_alnum]*\\)=\\(.*\\)/\\1='\\2'/p" ;; *) # `set' quotes correctly as required by POSIX, so do not add quotes. sed -n \ "s/^\\([_$as_cr_alnum]*_cv_[_$as_cr_alnum]*\\)=\\(.*\\)/\\1=\\2/p" ;; esac; }
There was a discussion on the tcl-core list about this problem (including a fix). http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/tcl-core/2964514 (The bug is in tcl-8.4.11 too).
With tcl version 8.4.11 I get the following error: checking if 64bit Sparc VIS support is requested... no checking system version (for dynamic loading)... ./configure: line 7624: syntax error near unexpected token `)' ./configure: line 7624: ` OSF*)'
3.3-r1 in cvs.
*** Bug 130265 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 130667 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 131145 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
If the bug I entered is a duplicate of this bug then can someone please re-open it? This is a current issue and I can not seem to compile gnome without it.
*** Bug 131180 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to comment #7) > If the bug I entered is a duplicate of this bug then can someone please re-open > it? This is a current issue and I can not seem to compile gnome without it. I'd suggest reading Comment #3.
I did read comment #3. They put the fix in CVS almost 4 months ago. It's marked unstable, however. So in order to install a version that will complie we need to unmask an unstable package while the version that won't compile is marked stable. This doesn't make sense. What I don't understand is that this wasn't an issue for months. It just jsut became an issue once again recently. What was changed to cause this issue now? (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #7) > > If the bug I entered is a duplicate of this bug then can someone please re-open > > it? This is a current issue and I can not seem to compile gnome without it. > > I'd suggest reading Comment #3. >
*** Bug 131482 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to comment #10) > What I don't understand is that this wasn't an issue for months. It just jsut > became an issue once again recently. What was changed to cause this issue now? This is caused by bash-3.1 (like many other tcl-related ebuilds' bugs).
*** Bug 131759 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 132114 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 132199 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 132559 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I suppose my comment is ... why is -r1 marked unstable? Marking it stable would stop further reports on this, I think.
*** Bug 133261 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 133082 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reopen for stabilization. Please, stabilize 3.3-r1 wrt Bug 132990, 3.3 doesn't compile w/ current stable bash.
(In reply to comment #20) > Reopen for stabilization. Please, stabilize 3.3-r1 wrt Bug 132990, 3.3 doesn't > compile w/ current stable bash. > I second this. Either stabilize 3.3-r1 or do something to resolve the bug as it is.
x86 done ^.^
(In reply to comment #22) > x86 done ^.^ > Thanks, builds like a charm. :D
3.3-r1 stable on alpha and amd64.
Marked ppc stable by hansmi, thanks!
All done, thanks - closing.
