--- Comment #30 from lauras at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-02 01:13 ---
For the record, this was caused by obsolete awk version, please upgrade if you
experience this problem. The need to document awk prerequisite is tracked in
PR 30739.
--
lauras at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #31 from lauras at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-02 01:14 ---
Closing.
--
lauras at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #29 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-24 08:19
---
This works for me and many many other people.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #27 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 06:19 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
# uname -a
as previously mentioned (comment #9), it's: Linux syssiphus 2.6.17.4 #1 SMP
PREEMPT Mon Sep 11 14:42:28 CEST 2006 i686 unknown
# cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id
--- Comment #28 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-09-13 15:03 ---
Apparently, your target_flags sets MASK_64BIT. You need to run gdb on cc1 and
set hardware watchpoint on target_flags to see where it sets MASK_64BIT:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc]$ touch x.i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc]$ gdb cc1
GNU
--- Comment #1 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-12 23:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=12238)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12238action=view)
config.cache created by running ./configure w/o any flags
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-12 23:53 ---
I was able to compile 20060909 on i686-linux-gnu just fine.
How did you configure GCC?
Did you build in the src directory?
How did you invoke make to build GCC?
What is the output of ./config.guess in the source
--- Comment #3 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-12 23:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=12239)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12239action=view)
config.log as created by configure
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #4 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-12 23:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=12240)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12240action=view)
config.status as created by configure
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #5 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-12 23:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=12241)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12241action=view)
toplevel Makefile created by configure
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #6 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-12 23:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=12242)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12242action=view)
Makefile from gcc sub folder as created by configure
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #7 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-12 23:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=12243)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12243action=view)
complete log from running make using -d debug switch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #8 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-12 23:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=12244)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12244action=view)
last hundred lines of the complete Makefile log w/ debug output
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #9 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:09 ---
I was able to compile 20060909 on i686-linux-gnu just fine.
so was I, but not on a SMP (multi-processor) machine
How did you configure GCC?
as I mentioned in the original report, I didn't use any configure whatsoever
--- Comment #10 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:12 ---
How did you configure GCC?
as I mentioned in the original report, I didn't use any configure whatsoever
originally
Just for clarification: I missed to write configure flags, of course I DID
use configure!
--
--- Comment #11 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=12245)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12245action=view)
environment variables as requested
these are the environment variables that are set in bash for the root user
currently
--- Comment #12 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:24 ---
I was able to compile 20060909 on i686-linux-gnu just fine.
so was I, but not on a SMP (multi-processor) machine
Just to summarize my original and somewhat lengthy reply: I have come to the
assumption that the SMP
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-13 00:27
---
(In reply to comment #12)
No it does not. Are you sure you don't have some bad hardware?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
--- Comment #14 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:30 ---
Sorry, I just realized that I somehow managed to forget to post the actual
error and warning messages:
/root/tmp/plain/./gcc/xgcc -B/root/tmp/plain/./gcc/
-B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/
--- Comment #15 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:36 ---
No it does not.
Well, as I said: it's just an assumption-for the lack of a better explanation
right now.
Are you sure you don't have some bad hardware?
well, define bad hardware-the system works without any problems
--- Comment #16 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:44 ---
Also, with regards to bad hardware: this is a multiprocessor server system
that's in use every day, it's got numerous inbuilt hardware failure-detection
mechanisms, so as soon as there's a CPU, memory or hard disk problem,
--- Comment #17 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 00:51 ---
No it does not. Are you sure you don't have some bad hardware?
Just to summarize everything again: the hardware problem you anticipate would
then vanish partially when providing the -m32 switch to xgcc/cc1 directly (or
--- Comment #18 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2006-09-13 00:56
---
Subject: Re: New: possible problem: building gcc = 4.2
on i686 GNU/Linux|SMP (non-64bit) platform fails
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, WISD00M at GMX dot NET wrote:
./xgcc -B./ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/
--- Comment #19 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 01:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=12246)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12246action=view)
the complete configargs.h file from the build gcc sub directory
--
--- Comment #20 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 01:11 ---
I'm sorry, I obviously messed up the first translation unit that fails in my
original posting (the error that I posted was already a later error, when I had
adjusted the Makefile already). So, from a (FRESH) tarball
--- Comment #21 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 01:16 ---
Just for your info, when I now (again) MANUALLY ADD -m32 to the parameter
list, everything works again as expected:
Reading specs from ./specs
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.2-20060906/configure
--- Comment #22 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-09-13 02:56 ---
I only saw this with gcc plus the biarch patch. I have no problem with building
gcc 4.2 on Linux/x86 SMP machines.
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #23 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 03:16 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
I only saw this with gcc plus the biarch patch.
what exactly is this, could you be more specific?
did you see the VERY SAME type of error/warnings while trying to build?
and NO: this is an
--- Comment #24 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 03:24 ---
weird enough, when configuring target/host/build all set to
i586-pc-linux-gnu, the whole make process still cancels at the same point,
even though the 64 bit stuff should theoretically not even be touched at
all(?).
thus,
--- Comment #25 from WISD00M at GMX dot NET 2006-09-13 05:02 ---
Just for your info: I just tried to compile the two previous official releases
on the same machine to troubleshoot this issue further (using no configure/make
flags WHATSOEVER, building in a separate build directory in
--- Comment #26 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-09-13 05:46 ---
I have a dual Northwood with HT. I am running 2.6.9 kernel from RHEL 4 U4. Can
you show me the output of
# uname -a
# cat /proc/cpuinfo
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29049
31 matches
Mail list logo
