Re: SIGFPE and -mieee
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 12:04 pm, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > If a program divides by zero, it is a bug. If it can't handle > an overflow, it is a bug. If the author *knows* there could be > a division by zero or simmilar, he/she has to provide checks. If a program divides by zero or triggers a divide overflow in floating-point math, it's supposed to generate a very specific and clearly defined result per IEEE standards. I don't see that it's a "bug" for a program to depend on industry standards being in effect. It would be a nice "optimization" code-wise if it did not, and that optimization has real practical value on Alpha platforms prior to EV6. On other platforms it's kind of pointless. > -mieee is for software where speed is absolutly irrelevant and > where bugs like those mentions are no problems (e.g. an office > suite). Also it can be a first step to get an application > running on alpha at all. But IMHO this should be decided on a > case by case basis and not be stuck into every compilation; > especially since several programs are fixed now and can work > fine without -mieee (or never needed one in the first place). I can appreciate that fixing the problem after discovery would be easy, but discovery is not always so easy. Leaving out -mieee could cause latent misbehavior in an app--"walking wounded" that never even gets noticed and treated before it's back out in the field, then keels over three weeks later. That doesn't sit well with me. Basically, to prevent that, we'd need a top-notch engineer or two carefully and thoroughly auditing code for this problem as it comes in. I'm not terribly sure we could find someone willing to spend his life in a basement poring over fifteen metric tons of code a month with a fine-tooth comb. Sure I'd like stuff to perform at its best, even on obsolete machines, but it's really a question of how far we're willing or able to go for that. -- Kelledin "If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?"
Re: SIGFPE and -mieee
Hello, On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:10:01AM -0400, George France wrote: > Everything built for alpha should use -mieee. It is not need on most other > architrectures, but it is almost a requirement for the alpha architecture. Sure, since all other (popular) architectures implement the IEEE standard. > This has been a subject of lengthy discussion on several mailing list. Well, which ones? I can't remember such discussions with the outcome you mention on either debian alpha nor redhat-axp. One of the reasons for the speed of alpha is the ability to calculate fast, eliminating often unnecessary checks. So why should we do away this advantage by re-inserting those checks on a broad basis again when compiling software? If a program divides by zero, it is a bug. If it can't handle an overflow, it is a bug. If the author *knows* there could be a division by zero or simmilar, he/she has to provide checks. -mieee is for software where speed is absolutly irrelevant and where bugs like those mentions are no problems (e.g. an office suite). Also it can be a first step to get an application running on alpha at all. But IMHO this should be decided on a case by case basis and not be stuck into every compilation; especially since several programs are fixed now and can work fine without -mieee (or never needed one in the first place). > I hope this helps. Nope, sorry. Greetings Helge -- Helge Kreutzmann, Dipl.-Phys. [EMAIL PROTECTED] gpg signed mail preferredgpg-key: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] 64bit GNU powered http://www.itp.uni-hannover.de/~kreutzm Help keep free software "libre": http://www.freepatents.org/ pgpU9C180cvA5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: CCC Install
Hi,
where does gcc point to ? is it gcc 3.3, 3.3 or 2.95 ? Please search for this
problem in the archives. It's been discussed before. I think it's because -V is
no longer supported in gcc 3.3
Ionut
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:15:10PM +1000, Kris Amy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just trying to install CCC today and dpkg reports this error.
>
> Setting up ccc (6.5.9.001-1) ...
>
> Error: gcc -V 2.95.4 failed to compile and link "int main(int argc, char
> **argv) {return 0;}".
>The ccc installation expects a working installation of GCC.
> gcc: `-V' must come at the start of the command line
> Aborting
>
> If you can correct the problem, you can rerun this script manually
> by entering a command in the following format:
>
> create-comp-config.sh ccc-version [gcc-path]
>
> The current invocation of create-comp-config.sh was:
>
> /usr/lib/compaq/ccc-6.5.9.001-6/alpha-linux/bin/create-comp-config.sh
> ccc-6.5.9.001-6 /usr/lib/gcc-lib/alpha-linux/2.95.4
> dpkg: error processing ccc (--configure):
> subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
> Errors were encountered while processing:
> ccc
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
>
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Kris
--
***
* Ionut Georgescu
* http://www.physik.tu-cottbus.de/~george/
* Registered Linux User #244479
*
* "In Windows you can do everything Microsoft wants you to do; in Unix you
*can do anything the computer is able to do."
Re: SIGFPE and -mieee
Everything built for alpha should use -mieee. It is not need on most other architrectures, but it is almost a requirement for the alpha architecture. This has been a subject of lengthy discussion on several mailing list. I hope this helps. --George On Tuesday 17 June 2003 02:49 am, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > Hello, > > I strongly object. Often -mieee masks real programming errors, like > divisons by zero. I'd rather go for the following strategy: If the > programm is not time critical, and upstream is unwilling to deal with > those problems than -mieee can be added *for that package*. Otherwise > many programms run fine without or the maintainer/upstream is willing > to work those problems out. I've already reported and helped to fix > several packages which could have been "repaired" by using -mieee; and > I do not own an alpha to slow it down with -mieee just because it is > so easy to (not) fix the bugs. > > So please contact the package owners in question and check if they are > aware of the problems and/or if fixes are available. Better yet, use > the BTS. In the case of large pieces of code which are only run on > destop style of computers and which are fast moving (e.g. in rapid > developement) -mieee might indeed be sensible. > > If you insist on -mieee than set up an autobuilder (e.g. pbuilder or > simmilar) where you can set up specific options like this. > > Greetings > > Helge
CCC Install
Hi,
Just trying to install CCC today and dpkg reports this error.
Setting up ccc (6.5.9.001-1) ...
Error: gcc -V 2.95.4 failed to compile and link "int main(int argc, char
**argv) {return 0;}".
The ccc installation expects a working installation of GCC.
gcc: `-V' must come at the start of the command line
Aborting
If you can correct the problem, you can rerun this script manually
by entering a command in the following format:
create-comp-config.sh ccc-version [gcc-path]
The current invocation of create-comp-config.sh was:
/usr/lib/compaq/ccc-6.5.9.001-6/alpha-linux/bin/create-comp-config.sh
ccc-6.5.9.001-6 /usr/lib/gcc-lib/alpha-linux/2.95.4
dpkg: error processing ccc (--configure):
subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
Errors were encountered while processing:
ccc
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
Any ideas?
Kris
pgp8KoIbSHrzX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: SIGFPE and -mieee
Hello, On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 09:25:17PM -0400, Tyson Whitehead wrote: > ifeq ($(DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE),alpha-linux) > export CFLAGS+=-mieee > export CXXFLAGS+=-mieee > endif > > to the debian/rules file in the source package (right after the > DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE ?= ... line at the start of the file) . So far I've > recompiled the kdelibs and the kdebase packages. This is enough to get > Konqueor and the KOffice suite running in our lab. > > I would really like to see this made the default for all debian/rules files > (unless we know the code uses the FPU and can never generate any > denormalized, etc numbers). The lack of it makes several programs not run at > all, and others that appear to be operating okay all of a sudden crash (when > clicking on the property box for an EPS file inserted into KPresenter for > example -- kind of a nasty suprise). > > Any comments? Is this okay with the majority of you? Is there a way I can > email all the maintainers to get them to add the above four lines to their > debian/rules files? I strongly object. Often -mieee masks real programming errors, like divisons by zero. I'd rather go for the following strategy: If the programm is not time critical, and upstream is unwilling to deal with those problems than -mieee can be added *for that package*. Otherwise many programms run fine without or the maintainer/upstream is willing to work those problems out. I've already reported and helped to fix several packages which could have been "repaired" by using -mieee; and I do not own an alpha to slow it down with -mieee just because it is so easy to (not) fix the bugs. So please contact the package owners in question and check if they are aware of the problems and/or if fixes are available. Better yet, use the BTS. In the case of large pieces of code which are only run on destop style of computers and which are fast moving (e.g. in rapid developement) -mieee might indeed be sensible. If you insist on -mieee than set up an autobuilder (e.g. pbuilder or simmilar) where you can set up specific options like this. Greetings Helge -- Helge Kreutzmann, Dipl.-Phys. [EMAIL PROTECTED] gpg signed mail preferredgpg-key: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] 64bit GNU powered http://www.itp.uni-hannover.de/~kreutzm Help keep free software "libre": http://www.freepatents.org/ pgpTozNKpDmJo.pgp Description: PGP signature
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thankyou for the xfree86 4.3.0 sid alpha.debs !]
- Forwarded message from Geoff Brimhall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 20:43:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Geoff Brimhall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Thankyou for the xfree86 4.3.0 sid alpha.debs ! To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] They really kick ass, especially the newer xlibmesa4-dri My system: Alpha 164LX + ATI 7500 PCI One question - I am seeing the infamous flickering, the worst being the kde 3.1 Morph3d opengl screen saver. Any xfree86 config options to try out, or is it just wait for the DRI developers to figure this one out ? Anything i could do to help ? Thanks, geoff Brimhall [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com - End forwarded message - -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgpahwblzxL5X.pgp Description: PGP signature
