Bug 490265 - The version of SWIG shipped with RHEL 5 (5.3?) is one revision too old
Summary: The version of SWIG shipped with RHEL 5 (5.3?) is one revision too old
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: swig
Version: 5.3
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Adam Tkac
QA Contact: BaseOS QE
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 558795 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-03-14 13:48 UTC by David Sugar
Modified: 2013-04-30 23:42 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Rebase: Bug Fixes and Enhancements
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-04-13 10:46:36 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description David Sugar 2009-03-14 13:48:54 UTC
Description of problem:

SWIG versions prior to 1.3.30 does not support correct expansion of $self.  Many modern (recently written) swig wrappers now use $self expansion to define object destructors, and these all of course fail to build with the version of swig distributed.  The version shipped is 1.3.29 which is several years old.  If it can be "bumped" even minimally to 1.3.30 (or better a more recent 1.3.x release) this would resolve this issue.
 
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

1.3.29

How reproducible:

Build a swig with a $self reference.  You will get error: '$self' was not declared in this scope.  A typical note about this can be found here: http://www.mail-archive.com/m5-dev@m5sim.org/msg02184.html as there is much discussion also findable on google for this issue...

Comment 1 Adam Tkac 2010-01-27 09:28:55 UTC
*** Bug 558795 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 4 Radek Vokál 2010-04-13 10:45:33 UTC
We don't plan to rebase swig in next releases of RHEL5. If you feel that this issue is critical for you, please contact redhat.com/support .

Comment 5 RHEL Program Management 2010-04-13 10:46:36 UTC
Development Management has reviewed and declined this request.  You may appeal
this decision by reopening this request.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.