[PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

Since we're in stage3, I'm raising the issue of the MPFR version we require for GCC, just as in last year's stage3 for gcc-4.3: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-12/msg00298.html I'd like to increase the "minimum" MPFR version to 2.3.0, (which has been released since Aug 2007). The "recommended" ver

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:33 AM, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since we're in stage3, I'm raising the issue of the MPFR version we > require for GCC, just as in last year's stage3 for gcc-4.3: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-12/msg00298.html > > I'd like to increase the "minimum" MPFR

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, Richard Guenther wrote: > This is reasonable. Note that > http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html already lists > mpfr 2.3.0 as prerequesite (that page still might need an update for > clarification). That page is generated from gcc/doc/install.texi, so once Kaveh has co

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, Richard Guenther wrote: >> This is reasonable. Note that >> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html already lists >> mpfr 2.3.0 as prerequesite (that page still might need an update for >> clarifi

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

2008/10/5 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Ah, right. Don't we want this page to be version-specific beyond > gcc.gnu.org/gcc-X.Y/? > (like all of the installation instructions, liked from onlinedocs/ > there is only instructions > for trunk). This is bug 32927. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 09:33:48PM -0400, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote: > Since we're in stage3, I'm raising the issue of the MPFR version we > require for GCC, just as in last year's stage3 for gcc-4.3: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-12/msg00298.html > > I'd like to increase the "minimum" MPFR version

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

From: "Richard Guenther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:33 AM, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Okay for mainline? Ok if there are no objections within the week. Thanks, Richard. Great, thanks. Can I get an explicit ack from a fortran maintainer as well? Reg

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Kaveh R. Ghazi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: "Richard Guenther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:33 AM, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Okay for mainline? >> >> Ok if there are no objections within the week. >> >> Thanks, >>

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

"Kaveh R. GHAZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since we're in stage3, I'm raising the issue of the MPFR version we > require for GCC, just as in last year's stage3 for gcc-4.3: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-12/msg00298.html > > I'd like to increase the "minimum" MPFR version to 2.3.0, (which ha

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:34:37AM -0700, Geoff Keating wrote: > "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > There appears to be no Red Hat-based distribution that comes with > 2.3.2 or later. Even Fedora 10, which is not yet released, does not > appear to include it. FYI, Fedora 10 has 2.3.2

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

From: "Geoff Keating" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I found that simply building MPFR in a non-default location (configure --prefix && make) and then pointing GCC at it with --with-mpfr, as in the installation instructions, causes the bootstrap to fail when first running xgcc, because xgcc can't find the

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On 26/10/2008, at 12:25 PM, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote: From: "Geoff Keating" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I found that simply building MPFR in a non-default location (configure --prefix && make) and then pointing GCC at it with --with-mpfr, as in the installation instructions, causes the bootstrap to fai

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

Geoff Keating wrote: It seems like mostly, anyone using the compiler farm has to use --with-mpfr, and otherwise people avoid it. A random data point: if you use --with-gmp (as I have to), configure finds an mpfr in the same subdirectory, so you might want to look for that as well. Cheers, -

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

Geoff Keating wrote: Does everyone really type --with-mpfr= on every build? Looking at gcc-testresults, I see: Kaveh: yes Joey Ye: no HJ: no Guerby: yes Andreas Jaeger: no Dave Anglin: no Janis: yes Gerald Pfeifer: no Diego: yes Andreas Krebbel: no It seems like mostly, anyone using the

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 09:51:44PM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote: > Geoff Keating wrote: > >> Does everyone really type --with-mpfr= on every build? Looking@ >> gcc-testresults, I see: >> >> Kaveh: yes >> Joey Ye: no >> HJ: no >> Guerby: yes >> Andreas Jaeger: no >> Dave Anglin: no >> Janis: yes

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Kaveh R. Ghazi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think the steps you (or your assistant) went through was unfortunately > unnecessarily complicated. The solution I use is to build MPFR and/or GMP > using --disable-shared. Then you can install them anywhere you like,

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, David Edelsohn wrote: > Graphite's CLooG and PPL libraries use libgmpxx. Because cc1 is not linked > by g++, this effectively requires that libgmpxx must be a shared > library. libgmp I hope the Graphite people are working on fixing this for 4.4. As I said in

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Joseph S. Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, David Edelsohn wrote: > >> Graphite's CLooG and PPL libraries use libgmpxx. Because cc1 is not linked >> by g++, this effectively requires that libgmpxx must be a shared >> library. libgmp > > I hop

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Joseph S. Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, David Edelsohn wrote: > >> Graphite's CLooG and PPL libraries use libgmpxx. Because cc1 is not linked >> by g++, this effectively requires that libgmpxx must be a shared >> library. libgmp > > I hop

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Joseph S. Myers > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, David Edelsohn wrote: > > > >> Graphite's CLooG and PPL libraries use libgmpxx. Because cc1 is not linked > >> by g++, this effectively requires th

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

Richard Guenther wrote: On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Joseph S. Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, David Edelsohn wrote: Graphite's CLooG and PPL libraries use libgmpxx. Because cc1 is not linked by g++, this effectively requires that libgmpxx must be a shared library.

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortran bits)

On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, Geoff Keating wrote: > Does everyone really type --with-mpfr= on every build? While we're listing practices, and since nobody's listed it, lest people think that method isn't used, mine is to *always build with in-tree gmp and mpfr*: whether at the compile farm, in a packa