Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Rainer Orth (25/4/05 12:28 +0200) [Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support]: Partial success only. I think I'll be able to build it without C++ support, but compilation per your instruction does choke on libstdc++.so.6.0.4. I've had the same problem and think I know what's going

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Jeroen Scheerder writes: Rainer Orth (25/4/05 12:28 +0200) [Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support]: Partial success only. I think I'll be able to build it without C++ support, but compilation per your instruction does choke on libstdc++.so.6.0.4. I've had the same problem

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

I configured/made/installed gcc 4.0.0 partially on a Solaris host. I could not build with C++ support, because ld (GNU ld, that is) choked (dumped core, signal 11, segmentation violation) on abi_check (see below). When using the Sun-supplied as and ld, ld chokes on alignment errors during

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Joseph S. Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I recommend using GNU as and Sun ld. /usr/sfw/bin/as should be a suitable version of the GNU assembler, or try the 2.15.97 binutils snapshot (from ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/binutils/snapshots/) for an assembler which should also be sufficiently recent

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Jeroen Scheerder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Partial success only. I think I'll be able to build it without C++ support, but compilation per your instruction does choke on libstdc++.so.6.0.4. I've had the same problem and think I know what's going on. ld: fatal: relocation error: file:

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Jeroen Scheerder writes: So obviously Sun ld doesn't have the necessary support for COMDAT groups (even with GNU ld, a quite recent version seems to be required). Unfortunately, gcc's configure.ac doesn't check for this, but should. Your analysis is very convincing. So an ugly

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 12:28:18PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: If I compare stdexcept.s when building with /usr/sfw/bin/gas vs. gas 2.15.96, I see differences like the following: .Ltext0: .weak _ZTISt11logic_error - .section

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Daniel Jacobowitz writes: So obviously Sun ld doesn't have the necessary support for COMDAT groups (even with GNU ld, a quite recent version seems to be required). Unfortunately, gcc's configure.ac doesn't check for this, but should. So you're using gas with the Sun linker? Yes, the

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 05:05:32PM +0200, Jeroen Scheerder wrote: Daniel Jacobowitz: [...] So obviously Sun ld doesn't have the necessary support for COMDAT groups (even with GNU ld, a quite recent version seems to be required). Unfortunately, gcc's configure.ac doesn't check for

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Daniel Jacobowitz: [...] Note that no other combination will even bootstrap. GNU ld stumbles upon a Sun-supplied crt*.o file, and Sun's as chokes on the generated assembly (x86_64 instructions it fails to handle?). GNU ld ought to work; what's the error look like?

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

Jeroen Scheerder writes: Note that no other combination will even bootstrap. GNU ld stumbles upon a Sun-supplied crt*.o file, and Sun's as chokes on the generated assembly (x86_64 instructions it fails to handle?). There are several issues with the native as, discussed in

Re: Built gcc 4.0.0, without C++ support

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Jeroen Scheerder wrote: Note that builds on Solaris 10 on AMD Opteron (on a Sun Fire V20z) failed miserably. With the Sun-supplied as and ld, bootstraps chokes on syntax errors in assembly files; with GNU as and ld, bootstrap chockes on invalid instructions (64-bit AMD