On 12/4/18 4:11 PM, Charles A Daniels wrote:
>> This version is much nicer.
> I agree your version is more pleasing. I approve of using this.
>
> I'm still new around here and learning the conventions, so having this
> to diff is very helpful for me.
>
> My interpretation of Mike's (the upstream) response was that pcalc-4
> isn't known to work reliably on 32 bit systems right now, but I would
> appreciate it if anyone with an i386 or other 32 bit arch could test to
> make sure the issue (https://github.com/vapier/pcalc/issues/7) isn't
> macppc specific. I'm happy to continue being the liaison to the
> upstream as other arches or issues are discovered.
>
> I think it should be safe to ship pcalc-4 as it stands on AMD64, and
> probably other 64 bit arches (I don't have any to test on though).
>
> Thanks for your help Brian!
>
Upstream says "32-bit systems are supported, i just don't actively test
on them anymore, so problems like this might slip in."
Since it is a tiny utility in C with only bison as a BDEP, I take that
to mean "might as well build it everywhere and if users report that it's
broken don't be afraid to mark it ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=${LP64_ARCHS} and
bother upstream about fixing it," which it seems to be on the table
anyway with a move to using GMP.
~Brian
No comments:
Post a Comment