Laurent,
 
The tests fail loudly, but that appears to be a known problem, and they can fail with FFI working (save doubles).  Maybe the problem John mentions is behind the library loading troubles??
 
Bill
 

From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of laurent laffont
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 7:32 AM
To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Linux vm: assertions and strategy

I'm totally noob on FFI. Maybe the vm-dev mailing list is more appropriate ?  It seems there's actually some problems with it http://n4.nabble.com/forum/Search.jtp?tpl=search-page&node=104410&query=ffi

On my machine, 20/21 FFI unit tests fails...

I haven't been able to build last revision of squeak-vm trunk.

Laurent Laffont


On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab@anest.ufl.edu> wrote:
Laurent, all,

If I may jump to conclusions a little, the 3.11-3 vm's changes break the loading of libraries, certainly to the point of being arkane.  Beyond that, LinuxODBC is transparent to it, so I am left wondering how it is suppose to work at all??

The RC3 one-click image and vm produce very nice fonts on my Ubuntu laptop, but it retains the FFI/double defect, and from the naming of the plugins, must be based on a pre 3.11-3 vm.

Is the plan to use 3.11-3 for the one-click?  If so, we need to do something about external libraries; at a minimum, LinuxODBC should work, whether by fully understanding how to use environment variables, or (as I suspect) getting the dlopen() call to work again.

Another option is to identify the FPU related fixes and apply them to the current one-click vm.

Any preferences?  Any success with 3.11-3 and LinuxODBC?  I'd be happy to be wrong about this.

Bill


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project