https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #8 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-04-30 13:36:17
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
manually. The more serious problem I found is that the final gnat executables
segfault on the m68k target.
Even with no argument,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-04-30
13:49:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
(In reply to comment #7)
manually. The more serious problem I found is that the final gnat
executables
segfault on the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #10 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-04-30 13:56:23
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #8)
to be an issue of bootstrapping from amd64, which platform did you use?
i686-linux.
Ok, then I can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #11 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-04-30
15:09:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
At a first glance, there’s a lot of system-linux-*.ads but none for m68k.
Should I have a look in that area, or is that not an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #12 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-04-30 15:20:08
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
It will be an issue, but I got the segfaults even with such a file, so I think
the problem is more fundamental than that.
OK, I’ll
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #13 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-04-30 15:31:06
UTC ---
Ah well. I found out that Ada doesn’t compile if you have a style error õÕ
and that “make clean” doesn’t clean all stampfiles… got a crosscompiler now,
let’s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #14 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-04-30
15:40:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Should we open up another bugreport for _that_ (port GNAT to GNU/Linux/m68k)
though, since it doesn’t really belong here?
Yes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #15 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-04-30 15:48:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
(In reply to comment #13)
Should we open up another bugreport for _that_ (port GNAT to GNU/Linux/m68k)
though, since it doesn’t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tg at mirbsd dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #5 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-04-29 23:09:28
UTC ---
Confirmed for gcc-4.4 (4.4.6-2)
Building from Debian/amd64 by the way. Workaround is:
copy/paste the failing command line into another shell,
then edit it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #6 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-04-29 23:41:11
UTC ---
I also believe this in gnattools/Makefile (generated) to be wrong:
# For cross builds of gnattools,
# put the host RTS dir first in the PATH to hide the default
--- Comment #2 from christian dot joensson at gmail dot com 2009-05-13
10:24 ---
what is the current situation concerning gnatlib? is that passed explicitly
from stage to stage?
--
christian dot joensson at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from christian dot joensson at gmail dot com 2009-05-13
10:25 ---
sorry, I meant gnatbind instead of gnatlib...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #1 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-13 09:28 ---
This was broken by the following change AFAICT (rev 121082):
2007-01-23 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR bootstrap/30541
* Makefile.def (flags_to_pass): Add GNATBIND and GNATMAKE.
*
16 matches
Mail list logo
