Hi! The current stable version of systemc in portage didn't compile with gcc-4.1. Moreover, there was a newer version of this package, which can be compiled with gcc-4.x using the patch provided in http://icodes.offis.de/downloads/index.php Only problem now is some of the examples provided in the package fail to compile, but I don't think this is critic. Perhaps the user should be informed through elog? I attach systemc-2.1.1.ebuild and the patch. This is my first contribution so I'm not sure everything's correct (though the ebuild is based on an existing one). Any feedback will be appreciated. Carles
Created attachment 113537 [details] systemc-2.1.1.ebuild
Created attachment 113539 [details, diff] systemc-2.1.1-gcc-4.1.patch
Hi, the ebuild works fine here with a few tests, few comments still : - I would have named the ebuild systemc-2.1-r1 or -p1 because the original tarball is systemc-2.1.v1 seems a bugfix version to me (in the 2.0 there is 2.O.1 so we may expect a 2.1.1 and 2.1.v1 is in the category 2.1... ). But it needs to be discussed a bit more ... - your ebuild is a derivative from systemc-2.2_beta20060605.ebuild? any good reason not to keep pkg_postinst ? - tests passes properly here, there is just one (examples/sysc/pkt_switch) which is expecting user input maybe we can skip it ? Aurélien
Hi, I don't know if it's a bug fix, but I agree that there might be a 2.1.1, so it definitely needs a change of name. To your other points, I deleted the pkg_postinst section as a temporary measure because the examples were not compiling for me. However I tested it again after seeing your post and it's working (don't know what went wrong the first time), so it should be re-added. Carles
(In reply to comment #4) > I don't know if it's a bug fix, but I agree that there might be a 2.1.1, so it > definitely needs a change of name. As far as I know, all fixes and updates in 2.1.1 are also in the 2.2 beta. Do you know any reason why we would add this release when we already have the 2.2 beta ? > the examples were not compiling for me. However I tested it again after > seeing your post and it's working (don't know what went wrong the first time), > so it should be re-added. The same happened to me, the tests wouldn't run, so I disabled them in the ebuild. So maybe I did something wrong. I'll check that again, and will change it if it works. However, I'm currently *very* busy with some other Gentoo stuff, so please give me a few days to react. Denis.
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > I don't know if it's a bug fix, but I agree that there might be a 2.1.1, so it > > definitely needs a change of name. > > As far as I know, all fixes and updates in 2.1.1 are also in the 2.2 beta. Do > you know any reason why we would add this release when we already have the 2.2 > beta ? well 2.2 beta seems to deprecates a lot of interfaces ... in particular when running gezel-2.2 apps linked with systemc-2.2 libs it seems to work but spams stdout with "deprecated" messages > > > the examples were not compiling for me. However I tested it again after > > seeing your post and it's working (don't know what went wrong the first time), > > so it should be re-added. > > The same happened to me, the tests wouldn't run, so I disabled them in the > ebuild. So maybe I did something wrong. I'll check that again, and will change > it if it works. > Well i think it's an upgrade problem : systemc-2.0.1 installs /usr/include/systemc as a directory >=systemc-2.1 installs /usr/include/systemc as a file it conflicts with the dir already present, therefore it's not installed. if you reinstall a version >=systemc-2.1 then everything is fine ... I don't really know how this should be handled ... Aurélien
(In reply to comment #6) > > > the examples were not compiling for me. However I tested it again after > > > seeing your post and it's working (don't know what went wrong the first time), > > > so it should be re-added. > > > > The same happened to me, the tests wouldn't run, so I disabled them in the > > ebuild. So maybe I did something wrong. I'll check that again, and will change > > it if it works. > > Well i think it's an upgrade problem : > systemc-2.0.1 installs /usr/include/systemc as a directory > >=systemc-2.1 installs /usr/include/systemc as a file > it conflicts with the dir already present, therefore it's not installed. > if you reinstall a version >=systemc-2.1 then everything is fine ... > I don't really know how this should be handled ... I now know what happened. Tests only work when systemc was previously emerged on your system, and that's wrong. I tried to fix the code, but at some point what I need is to manually redo some of the install code in src_test(), which is stupid. I may end up fixing that someday, but I'm not sure, and right now I have other priorities. Until then, I'll leave the ebuild as it is, tests can still be done by running the examples as explained here: http://dev.gentoo.org/~calchan/sci-electronics/tests/#doc_chap3 I'll ask for stabilization for the new version of systemc, and will close this bug once it's done. Denis.
systemc-2.2_beta20060605 is now stable. Closing this. Thanks to both of you for your participation. Denis.
