[Mono-list] build of mono 1.1.7 & 1.1.8.2 fails on Solaris: failure to compile mcs

[Paolo Molaro]

On 07/22/05 Jeremy Teo wrote:
> > A decent file(1) should report mcs.exe as a PE binary, but knowing this is Solaris...
> On Solaris 10 x86/AMD64 at least:
> 
> # file /opt/csw/bin/mono
> /opt/csw/bin/mono:      ELF 32-bit LSB executable 80386 Version 1,
> dynamically linked, stripped

See above, we were talking about mcs.exe, not mono.

On 07/22/05 Raja R Harinath wrote:
> > Usually, this 'safe' mcs.exe won't work either (because it's too old)
> 
> That would be a bug wouldn't it :-)
> 
> If you're building from tarballs, the mcs.exe is the _not_ too old.
> Anyway, mcs.exe won't be an issue -- it'll be mscorlib.dll -- and that
> will match the mono source code in the tarball.  So, it is safe.

Yes, I suppose so. It happened to me with a svn build not with a tarball
(I think the checking-mcs-works code may fail if the runtime has some
debug printfs and so on).

> The "usually" above probably refers to your experience with SVN
> checkouts rather than tarballs, and even that should be rare [1].
[...]
> [1] By default, SVN checkouts don't get any 'monolite' assemblies.
>     So, the only way you can get into this situation is if
> 
>       a. You had fetched monolite into the tree at some distant time past

a it is, but getting a new one didn't work.

lupus

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
lupus at debian.org                                     debian/rules
lupus at ximian.com                             Monkeys do it better