On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 03:57:49PM +0100, Marc-Olivier Barre wrote: > On 1/3/07, James Stone <jamesmstone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 01:58:43PM +0100, Marc-Olivier Barre wrote: > >> On 1/2/07, Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Talking about reverbs and convolution, I gave a try to jack-convolve. > >> >> It seems it does not compile with gcc 4.1.0.... asm problem (even with > >> >> the latest stable). > >> >> > >> >> Does someone knows of a patch to fix this ? > >> > > >> >It builds fine here with gcc 4.1.2. jack_convolve only uses ASM through > >> >libconvolve which can be built using libDSP (which in turn contains some > >> >ASM > >> >code).. > >> > > >> >Let us see the whole error messages maybe? > >> > > >> > >> Right... I was too fast writing this post :-) > >> > >> It is libDSP which contains some assembly code that doesn't seem to > >> compile well with my gcc. I have used the latest stable (5.0.2) which > >> (according to the changelog) contains "Support for gcc-4.x". > >> > > > >Just build it with gcc-3.4. > > > > I don't have it on my system and I don't intend to set it up unless I > have a real problem. The fact is, my system is a modified LFS, > composed of more than 500 packages that ALL compiled fine with gcc > 4.1.0 (only a few of them required a patch to compile properly). > > Actually, all the packages I have seen in the past few months that had > a problem with gcc 4.x just called it a bug and fixed it or (as is the > case with linuxsampler's assembly routines) decided to adapt their > software to take advantage of gcc 4.x new optimization stuff.... > > Why shall I install gcc 3.4 instead of reporting what a majority of > people call a bug ? > By the way, did you try the development version of libDSP? James
