[Fwd: [Inkscape-user] moving forward (Was: Re: cause of crashes)]
Whoops, meant to send this to the development list..
-----Forwarded Message----- From: MenTaLguY <mental@...3...> To: Inkscape Users List inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Inkscape-user] moving forward (Was: Re: cause of crashes) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:01:02 -0400
Ok, so it appears we're currently waiting on someone to test with a build of libgc that we know to have been compiled with the appropriate options (this means C++ support, but nothing else -- particularly no malloc replacement).
So, is someone willing to assume responsibility for making a new build of libgc to test with, and documenting what steps they took when building it?
-mental
MenTaLguY wrote:
Whoops, meant to send this to the development list..
-----Forwarded Message----- From: MenTaLguY <mental@...3...> To: Inkscape Users List inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Inkscape-user] moving forward (Was: Re: cause of crashes) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:01:02 -0400
Ok, so it appears we're currently waiting on someone to test with a build of libgc that we know to have been compiled with the appropriate options (this means C++ support, but nothing else -- particularly no malloc replacement).
So, is someone willing to assume responsibility for making a new build of libgc to test with, and documenting what steps they took when building it?
-mental
I have been building boehm-gc with the line:
./configure --host=i686-pc-mingw32 --prefix=/target --enable-cplusplus
According to the docs, --enable-redirect-malloc is the one we want to avoid, and I have not been using that.
The only material difference I can think of , is that we were using gc6.2 until we delivered 0.39, when we switched to gc6.3 in order to be in sync with Linux.
Bob
participants (2)
-
Bob Jamison
-
MenTaLguY