(On holiday so short)
The tarball name has changed to match the new Linaro conventions. I forgot to put that in the announcement. The inner directory name should change as well but was missed, sorry. On Jul 21, 2011 6:59 PM, "Paul Sokolovsky" <paul.sokolov...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Well, before proceeding further, there seems that tarball naming > convention has changed. For example, now it's > gcc-linaro-4.6-2011.07.tar.bz2 whereas before it was > gcc-linaro-4.6-2011.06-0.tar.bz2 . What's worse is that inside it's > still gcc-linaro-4.6-2011.07-0 top-level directory. The build script > uses tarball basename to find out uncompressed dir name, so builds fail > now. This can be worked around on build script level, but is example of > random inconsistency, and if let such will proliferate, there will be > more and more workarounds everywhere, so would be nice if toolchain WG > fixed tarball name on their side. > > Thanks, > Paul > > > On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 10:18:21 +0300 > Paul Sokolovsky <paul.sokolov...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 21:44:10 +0100 >> Chao Yang <chao.y...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> > Hi Paul, >> > >> > Just a reminder that the bug was found in gcc 4.6, to which, I >> > think, the patch should apply, not 4.5 only. >> >> Oops, sure, I just copied the wrong link, it should be >> http://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/4.6/4.6-2011.07/+download/gcc-linaro-4.6-2011.07.tar.bz2 >> instead. >> >> > >> > Thanks and regards >> > On 20 Jul 2011 21:12, "Paul Sokolovsky" <paul.sokolov...@linaro.org> >> > wrote: >> > > Hello Ulrich, >> > > >> > > On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 21:07:50 +0200 >> > > Ulrich Weigand <ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >> Zach Pfeffer <zach.pfef...@linaro.org> wrote on 07/20/2011 >> > >> 08:56:32 PM: >> > >> > Michael Hope <michael.h...@linaro.org> wrote: >> > >> > > Hey, we're getting ahead of ourselves here. The patch clears >> > >> > > the problem but it hasn't landed upstream and may not be >> > >> > > correct. We also haven't laid the ground work for triaging >> > >> > > the problem including: >> > >> > > * Describing the compiler involved (mainly how it's built) >> > >> > > * Reducing to a test case (normally preprocessed source) >> > >> > > * Reproducing and reducing the fault >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Any fix can introduce other bugs, so it's generally best to >> > >> > > work around a last minute issue and then test it properly for >> > >> > > the next release. We have a range of options: >> > >> > > * Work around it in the packaging (such as changing the >> > >> > > optimisation level, turning of debug, etc) >> > >> > > * Work around it in the source >> > >> > > * Carry a local patch to GCC >> > >> > > * Use an earlier release (say 2011.05) >> > >> > > >> > >> > > We should talk about this in Cambourne especially in >> > >> > > untangling what the Android compiler is, how it's built, and >> > >> > > adding it as a test case for our releases. >> > >> > >> > >> > Michael, >> > >> > >> > >> > Thanks for the feedback. Lets chat at Cambourne. For right now, >> > >> > can we reference Ken's tree to build a WIP Android to >> > >> > facilitate debugging? Could Ken continue to work with Chao to >> > >> > create a testcase that shows the bug? I have our session on >> > >> > Wednesday at 11:00 AM now where we can sort out some more >> > >> > structural issues. >> > >> >> > >> [Pulling in Richard on CC as well.] >> > >> >> > >> Note that by now Richard has done a proper fix of the underlying >> > >> compiler problem, which has now landed upstream: >> > >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01623.html >> > >> >> > >> So my recommendation would be to use this month's Linaro GCC >> > >> release with Richard's patch on top as the basis for the Android >> > >> compiler. (By next month, I'd assume Linaro GCC will contain >> > >> Richard's patch to start with.) >> > > >> > > That sounds like good plan. So, what process the toolchain team >> > > would suggest for this? I can imagine few choices: >> > > >> > > 1. Toolchain team prepares a tarball for Android team, which is >> > > >> > http://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/4.5/4.5-2011.07/+download/gcc-linaro-4.5-2011.07.tar.bz2 >> > > + http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01623.html >> > > 2. Toolchain team creates a bzr branch withich is 2011.07 release >> > > (with any possible bugfix releases) + that patch applied. >> > > 3. I just add support for applying patches to android-build and >> > > build >> > > >> > http://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/4.5/4.5-2011.07/+download/gcc-linaro-4.5-2011.07.tar.bz2 >> > > with the patch applied. >> > > >> > > My own preference probably would be even p.3, as it doesn't create >> > > extra entities, but as we want more people try and adopt Linaro >> > > tools, p.1 would be still preferable I guess. >> > > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards >> > >> >> > >> Ulrich Weigand >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Dr. Ulrich Weigand | Phone: +49-7031/16-3727 >> > >> STSM, GNU compiler and toolchain for Linux on System z and >> > >> Cell/B.E. IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH >> > >> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter | Geschäftsführung: >> > >> Dirk Wittkopp >> > >> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen | Registergericht: Amtsgericht >> > >> Stuttgart, HRB 243294 >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Best Regards, >> > > Paul >> > > >> > > Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs >> > > Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro >> > > http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - >> > > http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog >> >> >> > > > > -- > Best Regards, > Paul
_______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
