Hi, > Am 18.03.2015 um 10:29 schrieb Maciej Bliziński <mac...@opencsw.org>: > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:06:07AM +0100, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >>> Am 18.03.2015 um 08:55 schrieb Riccardo Mottola <rmott...@opencsw.org>: >>> >>> in the gcc receipe, which would be the last version that is supposed to run >>> on solaris 9, I find this: >>> >>> # We're not building GCC-4.7 on Solaris 9, because GCC-4.7 requires the >>> # sparcv8+ architecture. >>> # PACKAGING_PLATFORMS = solaris9-sparc solaris9-i386 >>> PACKAGING_PLATFORMS += solaris10-sparc solaris10-i386 >>> >>> Why is v8+ a problem? I understand we support UltraSPARC only anyway, be it >>> 32 or 64 bit. >>> I actually think to remember that the last operating system running on the >>> "classic" SPARCs, is Solaris 8. >> >> Nope, the minimum CPU level for Solaris 9 was sparcv8 whereas gcc 4.7 >> required sparcv8+ >> That does not mean you couldn’t just build with sparcv8+ and release for >> Solaris 9 as >> it would work on any platform past stonehenge. > > Right, it was the default setting in GAR for 5.9: to build sparcv8 > binaries. There was a time your packages would be rejected if you built > binaries for sparcv8+. This policy is now gone, and you can build and > release sparcv8+ binaries. > > We had a similar rule to build for 386, where 386 didn't stand for just > Intel processors, it actually meant the 386 processor, as opposed to the > newer 486.
I just looked and we raised the automatic buildlevel for Solaris 10 only: https://buildfarm.opencsw.org/trac/changeset/15907 If you build gcc for Solaris 9 you need to manually raise the buildlevel. Best regards — Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
