Re: preparing for GCC 4.9
Hello and apologies for the cross-post, I've built GCC 4.9 on my PowerMac G5 (ppc64) running Debian 7.3. I'd like to support the port of Debian to this platform using GCC 4.9 and would appreciate a pointer on where to begin if possible. Additionally, I could provide a SSH login to the machine. Thanks, Dave -Original Message- From: Matthias Klose Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 7:00 AM To: David Gosselin ; Patrick Baggett Cc: debian-po...@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: preparing for GCC 4.9 sorry, can't help with this. setting up a pbuilder or sbuild, and start building packages from the base system? Matthias Am 13.05.2014 03:26, schrieb David Gosselin: I'm in the same boat as Patrick, except with a PowerMac G5. Please let us know how to begin. Thanks, Dave On May 12, 2014, at 16:02, Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Matthias et al, I'd like to try to do some of this using my sparc box and see how far I get. Is there a link that explains how to set up these steps? Others seem to just know what to do, but I haven't the slightest idea of where to begin. I have a box with gcc-4.9, plenty of disk space, and electricity to burn. Where do I start? Patrick On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote: With gcc-4.9 now available in testing, it is time to prepare for the change of the default to 4.9, for a subset of architectures or for all (release) architectures. The defaults for the gdc, gccgo, gcj and gnat frontends already point to 4.9 and are used on all architectures. Issue #746805 tracks the gfortran default change, including the change of the Fortran 90 module version change. The Debian archive was rebuilt twice on amd64, once in February, resulting in bug submissions for GCC and feedback for the porting guide [1], a second time in March to file issues for packages failing to build with GCC 4.9 [2]. Another test rebuild for Ubuntu on amd64, i386, armhf, ppc64el didn't show any other compiler regressions on these architectures. I would like to see some partial test rebuilds (like buildd or minimal chroot packages) for other architectures. Any possibility to setup such a test rebuild for some architectures by the porters? Afaics the results for the GCC testsuite look okish for every architecture. I'll work on fixing the build failures in [2], help is of course appreciated. Almost all build failures are analyzed and should be easy to fix (exceptions e.g. #746883). Patches for the ones not caused by the Debian packaging may be found in distributions already using GCC 4.9 as the default compiler (e.g. Fedora 21). If anything goes well, and a large amount of build failures are fixed, I plan to make GCC 4.9 the default for the C/C++/ObjC/Obj-C++ frontends at the end of May, beginning of June. Bugs reports for packages building with a legacy version of GCC (4.6, 4.7, 4.8) will be filed. Matthias [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.9;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ia64-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/536ba1ce.9070...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5371fb4e.9090...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/B91D376632C449D19144C06F2D3226D4@Sam
Re: preparing for GCC 4.9
I'm in the same boat as Patrick, except with a PowerMac G5. Please let us know how to begin. Thanks, Dave On May 12, 2014, at 16:02, Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Matthias et al, I'd like to try to do some of this using my sparc box and see how far I get. Is there a link that explains how to set up these steps? Others seem to just know what to do, but I haven't the slightest idea of where to begin. I have a box with gcc-4.9, plenty of disk space, and electricity to burn. Where do I start? Patrick On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote: With gcc-4.9 now available in testing, it is time to prepare for the change of the default to 4.9, for a subset of architectures or for all (release) architectures. The defaults for the gdc, gccgo, gcj and gnat frontends already point to 4.9 and are used on all architectures. Issue #746805 tracks the gfortran default change, including the change of the Fortran 90 module version change. The Debian archive was rebuilt twice on amd64, once in February, resulting in bug submissions for GCC and feedback for the porting guide [1], a second time in March to file issues for packages failing to build with GCC 4.9 [2]. Another test rebuild for Ubuntu on amd64, i386, armhf, ppc64el didn't show any other compiler regressions on these architectures. I would like to see some partial test rebuilds (like buildd or minimal chroot packages) for other architectures. Any possibility to setup such a test rebuild for some architectures by the porters? Afaics the results for the GCC testsuite look okish for every architecture. I'll work on fixing the build failures in [2], help is of course appreciated. Almost all build failures are analyzed and should be easy to fix (exceptions e.g. #746883). Patches for the ones not caused by the Debian packaging may be found in distributions already using GCC 4.9 as the default compiler (e.g. Fedora 21). If anything goes well, and a large amount of build failures are fixed, I plan to make GCC 4.9 the default for the C/C++/ObjC/Obj-C++ frontends at the end of May, beginning of June. Bugs reports for packages building with a legacy version of GCC (4.6, 4.7, 4.8) will be filed. Matthias [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.9;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ia64-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/536ba1ce.9070...@debian.org
Re: Problems with X11 on Ultra10
Hi, I was curious as to what prompted you to try SBUS:/SUNW,ffb@1e,0 for the BusID value? Thanks, Dave -Original Message- From: Sad Clouds Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 3:57 AM To: Hayden Kroepfl Cc: debian-po...@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Problems with X11 on Ultra10 On Sun, 4 May 2014 08:25:16 +0100 Sad Clouds cryintotheblue...@googlemail.com wrote: On Sat, 03 May 2014 17:20:33 -0600 Hayden Kroepfl perlpow...@gmail.com wrote: On 03/05/14 03:39 PM, Sad Clouds wrote: Hello, I'm new to Debian and trying it out on Ultra10 which has Creator3D framebuffer. I installed Debian stable and seem to be having some issues with X11 or display manager. The system boots OK and I can see boot messages, but when it goes to start display manager the screen goes black and nothing happens. No windows, no mouse cursor, nothing. Any ideas? Might as well ask about the obvious right away, do you have your monitor hooked up to the onboard video in the bottom left corner (facing the back), or to the 13W3 video connector on the Creator3D? What could be happening is X11 picked the wrong card by default and is only showing it on the opposite connector. If you have a second monitor try hooking one up to the 13W3 and one to the VGA connector. Hayden K. Hello, that was the first thing I tried however there is no VGA signal on machfb. I managed to get IP address assigned to this machine from DHCP server, logged in via ssh and looked at the logs. Looks like X server has problems configuring framebuffer device. So I generated xorg.conf manually with 'X -configure' and it thinks I have 3 cards: Identifier Card0 Driver mach64 BusID PCI:1:2:0 Identifier Card1 Driver fbdev BusID PCI:1:2:0 Identifier Card2 Driver vesa BusID PCI:1:2:0 This looks wrong to me, one of them should be using sunffb driver. And why all three drivers refer to the same BusID? I tried copying this file to /etc/X11/xorg.conf and leaving only Identifier Card1 Driver sunffb BusID PCI:1:2:0 But still can't get X11 running Any ideas? OK changed that to BusID SBUS:/SUNW,ffb@1e,0 and X11 works now. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140504085745.1a1891593485ab7e82a14...@googlemail.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/A073714047E1467D83D0E44AD63B4AC6@Sam
