http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57128
Bug #: 57128
Summary: gcc-gnat problem halts gcc build
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
--- Comment #17 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2012-06-26 15:07:48 UTC
---
Thank you for reminding me to submit a follow-up. Yes, blas and lapack test
cleanly with gcc and gfortran version 4.6.3.
I have since encountered a difficulty
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53384
--- Comment #5 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2012-05-21 19:55:36 UTC
---
This problem I found with 4.6.3 somewhat disappeared after I first used v.
4.4.1 to make gcc-4.6.1 and install. Version 4.6.3 built ok starting with
4.6.1, so I would
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53400
--- Comment #4 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2012-05-20 22:23:07 UTC
---
Yes. I removed gcc-java-4.4.1 and got rid of the offending gjar, then included
java in a build of gcc-4.6.3. Built and installed as hoped with a new gjar.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53400
--- Comment #3 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2012-05-19 18:24:12 UTC
---
Updating it isn't possible as far as I know. If I removed java (and that may
not be possible either due to dependencies) or at least gjar, would gcc-java
build me
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53400
Bug #: 53400
Summary: java build failure with NullPointerException
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53384
--- Comment #4 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2012-05-18 15:07:48 UTC
---
This bug was actually two bugs, the checksum error and the erroneous handling
of the gcc used in fixincludes/config.cache
I found another way to trip the error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53384
--- Comment #2 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2012-05-17 16:47:08 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Are you building in the source directory?
No. I untarred all the source in /usr/local/gcc-4.6.3, all except the go
tarball, and built in my
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53384
--- Comment #3 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2012-05-17 23:23:52 UTC
---
I just got a good bootstrap build of gcc 4.6.3 after installing 4.6.1. The
installation of 4.6.1 must have added or changed something that didn't work
right in 4.4.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53384
Bug #: 53384
Summary: checksum (comparison) differs wrongly
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44228
John T jrt at worldlinc dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jrt at worldlinc dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48533
John T jrt at worldlinc dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jrt at worldlinc dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48533
--- Comment #1 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2011-04-13 18:53:29 UTC
---
On building all components of GCC 4.6.0 except java, ada and go, there was no
problem installing with the prefix for 4.6.0 set to /usr/local. The problem
seems
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48533
Summary: Installer fails on libjava component
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
--- Comment #14 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2011-02-18 16:58:45 UTC
---
Sorry for not responding sooner, had a health issue.
Here's the error message with the -static flag:
gfortran -g -o testieee tstiee.o
gfortran -fimplicit-none -g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
--- Comment #11 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2011-02-16 01:19:36 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #8)
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 07:56:05PM +, jrt at worldlinc dot net wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
--- Comment #6 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2011-02-11 19:56:02 UTC
---
I built the reference BLAS included with Lapack from source. I just got the
results from blas_testing using gcc-4.4.5 and results good again. I don't know
where
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
Summary: Numeric inaccuracy reported in testing lapack-3.3.0
BLAS module
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
--- Comment #2 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2011-02-11 00:33:39 UTC
---
I should have included that this bug applies to a Mandriva 2008.1 Duron x86
system with kernel 2.6.24, libc 2.7.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
--- Comment #3 from John T jrt at worldlinc dot net 2011-02-11 00:42:13 UTC
---
I must be tired. Gotta work tonight. The GCC 4.6 is the 20110205 snapshot.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22210
John T jrt at worldlinc dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jrt at worldlinc dot net
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jrt at worldlinc dot net
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: I586-Mandriva-Linux?
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http
--- Comment #1 from jrt at worldlinc dot net 2010-01-19 01:22 ---
I used inaccurate phrasing. I should have said that
The compiler flags used in compiling THE FOLLOWING were -O3 -funroll-loops.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42795
--- Comment #3 from jrt at worldlinc dot net 2010-01-19 02:58 ---
So setting a variable as the coder desires is no effect? Some would disagree.
A statement that really would not have an effect would be:
if (theworldis notenough);
The comparison indicated here perhaps is performed
--- Comment #5 from jrt at worldlinc dot net 2010-01-19 03:15 ---
Ahhh, i see. It appears that i is not assigned at the start of the loop. I
assigned it just before the loop, so the loop starts at the correct value. I
tried doing the assignment with an otherwise useless variable, don't
25 matches
Mail list logo
