Re: preparing for GCC 4.9 (bug squashing on May 16/17)
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 02:56:39PM +0200, Matthias Klose 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.
>
> An email a week ago to debian-{release,ports} [1] didn't show any obvious
> blockers, and various test rebuilds don't show at least any internal compiler
> errors anymore.
>
> The Debian archive was rebuilt twice on amd64, once in February, resulting in
> bug submissions for GCC and feedback for the porting guide [2], a second time
> in
> March to file issues for packages failing to build with GCC 4.9 [3]. Another
> test rebuild for mips64 didn't show any additional build failures [4]. Another
> test rebuild for Ubuntu on amd64, i386, armhf, ppc64el didn't show any other
> compiler regressions on these architectures.
>
> I'll work on fixing the build failures in [3], help is of course appreciated.
> Trying to be online on May 16/17 on IRC #debian-toolchain (OFTC) and uploading
> packages to the delayed queue.
>
> Almost all build failures are analysed 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) are
> filed [5] [6], and will be filed for 4.8 once 4.9 is the default.
There is a gcc 4.8.2 bug that currently prevents iceweasel 29 to build
on armhf, and it appears this bug is fixed in 4.9. Is it fine to build
depend on 4.9?
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140518091700.ga14...@glandium.org
Re: preparing for GCC 4.9 (bug squashing on May 16/17)
+++ Matthias Klose [2014-05-13 14:56 +0200]: > 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. > > I'll work on fixing the build failures in [3], help is of course appreciated. > Trying to be online on May 16/17 on IRC #debian-toolchain (OFTC) and uploading > packages to the delayed queue. >From the arm64 POV this is fine. I have found a few packages where gcc-4.8 causes ICEs and gcc-4.9 fixes them. I don't have the resource right now to do a full rebuild (as only ~half the archive is built once so far) but in general I expect 4.9 to give less trouble than 4.8 except for things that are broken for all arches. Did you try an arm64 rebuild with 4.9 in Ubuntu? Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140515172039.gn29...@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk
Re: preparing for GCC 4.9 (bug squashing on May 16/17)
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Matthias Klose wrote: > Am 13.05.2014 17:44, schrieb Yunqiang Su: >> Do you plan make 4.9 the only version of gcc in jessie? > > This first depends on building the kernel, both linux and kfreebsd, and eglibc > using gcc-4.9. > I tried build eglibc with gcc-4.9, and use it. All of them works well. For kernel, gcc-4.8/4.9 have a problem: the prevent the Loongson 3 kernel boot. We still have no idea why. gcc-4.7 works fine. -- Yunqiang Su -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAKcpw6UU-iM35oqXiOkyF_L3W9S5BmceRwOhBF4EbR=r2y0...@mail.gmail.com
Re: preparing for GCC 4.9 (bug squashing on May 16/17)
Am 13.05.2014 17:44, schrieb Yunqiang Su: > Do you plan make 4.9 the only version of gcc in jessie? This first depends on building the kernel, both linux and kfreebsd, and eglibc using gcc-4.9. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53724405.8070...@debian.org
Re: preparing for GCC 4.9 (bug squashing on May 16/17)
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Matthias Klose 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.
>
> An email a week ago to debian-{release,ports} [1] didn't show any obvious
> blockers, and various test rebuilds don't show at least any internal compiler
> errors anymore.
>
> The Debian archive was rebuilt twice on amd64, once in February, resulting in
> bug submissions for GCC and feedback for the porting guide [2], a second time
> in
> March to file issues for packages failing to build with GCC 4.9 [3]. Another
> test rebuild for mips64 didn't show any additional build failures [4]. Another
> test rebuild for Ubuntu on amd64, i386, armhf, ppc64el didn't show any other
> compiler regressions on these architectures.
>
> I'll work on fixing the build failures in [3], help is of course appreciated.
> Trying to be online on May 16/17 on IRC #debian-toolchain (OFTC) and uploading
> packages to the delayed queue.
>
> Almost all build failures are analysed 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) are
> filed [5] [6], and will be filed for 4.8 once 4.9 is the default.
Do you plan make 4.9 the only version of gcc in jessie?
>
> Matthias
>
> [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2014/05/msg00086.html
> [2] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html
> [3]
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.9;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org
> [4] https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2014/05/msg00087.html
> [5]
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=gcc-4.6-legacy;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org
> [6]
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=gcc-4.7-legacy;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53721687.2000...@debian.org
>
--
Yunqiang Su
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/cakcpw6wbhlne-noqodj0b26jod+jfg22h2qbsvs0qu+xep6...@mail.gmail.com
