[Python-bugs-list] [ python-Bugs-455183 ] Cygwin build fails for 2.2a2
noreply@sourceforge.net
noreply@sourceforge.net
Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:09:09 -0700
Bugs item #455183, was opened at 2001-08-24 19:20
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=455183&group_id=5470
Category: Build
Group: Platform-specific
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Assigned to: Martin v. Löwis (loewis)
Summary: Cygwin build fails for 2.2a2
Initial Comment:
The Cygwin build fails at the compile stage with the
error message that a working getaddrinfo function is
needed, unless the option "--disable-ipv6" is
selected.
I tried that option (as well as --with-threads=no),
and both configure and make ran successfully. I
started the interpreter from the Python-2.2a2
directory and successfully imported division and
generators from __future__. I ran the interpreter
test following the instructions for Cygwin and got
this message:
1 test failed:
test_strftime
31 tests skipped: test_al test_asynchat test_bsddb
test_cd test_cl test_dbm test_dl test_fork1 test_gl
test_imgfile test_largefile test_linuxaudiodev
test_locale test_minidom test_nis test_ntpath
test_openpty test_pty test_pyexpat test_sax
test_socket_ssl test_socketserver test_sunaudiodev
test_sundry test_thread test_threaded_import
test_threadedtempfile test_threading test_unicode_file
test_winreg test_winsound
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2001-09-13 00:09
Message:
Logged In: NO
Hi. Thanks for responding. Sorry about the anonymity; I
didn't realize SourceForge wouldn't even give you my e-mail
address. I'm Steve Burr, sburr@home.com.
Before responding to your message, I wanted to report some
good news about Cygwin. I updated to the latest version of
Cygwin today, and it appeared to eliminate the problem with
the test_poll hang that was reported in the README file and
that I had experienced myself. Both "make test" with
test_poll and "python test_poll.py" completed without
hanging.
The first problem I reported disappeared with the latest
alpha release. I downloaded and successfully built v.
2.2a3 on Cygwin without the --disable-ipv6 option. Just in
case this information would still be of interest, however,
the precise message generated by running ./configure for
2.2a2 (which I still have on my box) is:
checking for getaddrinfo... (cached) no
Fatal: You must get working getaddrinfo() function.
or you can specify "--disable-ipv6".
The second problem is still there. As you requested, I am
including the output from running test_strftime.py at the
end of this message.
_However_, in rereading the README, I saw that the strftime
problem in Cygwin has already been identified. Moreover,
the problems with strftime do not appear serious. All of
the time formats identified as being unsupported in the
output, except for "%Z", are in the ANSI C standard
according to the Python Library Reference (section 6.9).
The failure to return a value for "%Z" may be attributable
to the fact that I live in Arizona, which does not observe
DST. I'm guessing that at this time of year, "%Z" is the
same as the second value in the time.tzname tuple, which
for Arizona is an empty string.
The "%x" format does not return an inaccurate value, just a
non-standard format. I don't know why anyone would need "%
3y".
So trying to fix these glitches, if they're even fixable,
may not be worth your time, especially if you don't have
access to Cygwin.
Anyway, here's the test output:
strftime test for Wed Sep 12 22:45:45 2001
Strftime test, platform: cygwin, Python version: 2.2a3
Supports nonstandard '%c' format (near-asctime() format)
Conflict for nonstandard '%x' format (%m/%d/%y %H:%M:%S):
Expected 09/12/01, but got Wed Sep 12 2001
Does not appear to support '%Z' format (time zone name)
Does not appear to support '%D' format (mm/dd/yy)
Does not appear to support '%e' format (day of month as
number, blank padded ( 0-31))
Does not appear to support '%h' format (abbreviated month
name)
Does not appear to support '%k' format (hour, blank padded
( 0-23))
Does not appear to support '%n' format (newline character)
Does not appear to support '%r' format (%I:%M:%S %p)
Does not appear to support '%R' format (%H:%M)
Does not appear to support '%s' format (seconds since the
Epoch in UCT)
Does not appear to support '%t' format (tab character)
Does not appear to support '%T' format (%H:%M:%S)
Conflict for nonstandard '%3y' format (year without century
rendered using fieldwidth):
Expected 001, but got y
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 21, but got 20
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 22, but got 21
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 23, but got 22
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 24, but got 23
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 35, but got 34
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 36, but got 35
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 37, but got 36
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 49, but got 48
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 49, but got 48
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 50, but got 49
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 51, but got 50
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 10, but got 09
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 11, but got 10
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 12, but got 11
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 13, but got 12
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 24, but got 23
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 25, but got 24
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 26, but got 25
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 27, but got 26
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 38, but got 37
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 39, but got 38
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 40, but got 39
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 51, but got 50
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 52, but got 51
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 53, but got 52
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 01, but got 00
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 01, but got 00
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 12, but got 11
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 13, but got 12
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 14, but got 13
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 15, but got 14
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 26, but got 25
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 27, but got 26
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 28, but got 27
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 40, but got 39
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 41, but got 40
Conflict for %W (week number of the year (Mon 1st)):
Expected 42, but got 41
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Martin v. Löwis (loewis)
Date: 2001-09-06 00:32
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=21627
Can you give an exact copy of the error message you got
without disable-ipv6? I cannot reproduce the problem, as I
don't have a cygwin installation. Also, could you please
identify yourself?
Furthermore, can you please run test_strftime in isolation,
and report the output?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=455183&group_id=5470