https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #16 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Jan 3 11:28:27 2019
New Revision: 267551
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267551&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Update config.guess, config.sub (PR target/88535)
PR target/88535
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #15 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
>>> I wonder if the configure or make process should defend agai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from john henning ---
>> There are 3 different switches: --build, --host and --target.
>
> Hmm. I must be looking in the wrong place for documentation; are these
> ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Hmm. I must be looking in the wrong place for documentation; are these
> explained somewhere?
>
> At https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html I see a description of
>--target
> and a brief menti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #12 from john henning ---
Summary:
Eric's advice worked as prescribed.
Detail:
On a SPARC Solaris 11.4 system, with a /usr/bin/gcc
that by default produces 64-bit objects, this worked for
an 8.2.0 bootstrap build:
export CC=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #11 from john henning ---
> There are 3 different switches: --build, --host and --target.
Hmm. I must be looking in the wrong place for documentation; are these
explained somewhere?
At https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Is that switch similar to or different from the switch '--target=something',
> which http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html discourages from use?
There are 3 different switches: --build, --host and -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #9 from john henning ---
Eric, thank you for the explicit advice, although I note that both your
examples say '--build=something'.
Is that switch similar to or different from the switch '--target=something',
which http://gcc.gnu.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Yes, same for a bootstrap. You can bootstrap the latter with the former if
> you correctly configure the bootstrap, with explicit --build and CC="gcc
> -m32".
To be more explicit: if you want to bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
>> I wonder if the configure or make process should defend against the
>> possibility that the host compiler and the compiler that we are building
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I wonder if the configure or make process should defend against the
> possibility that the host compiler and the compiler that we are building
> today have differing defaults for -m32 vs -m64.
The problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #5 from john henning ---
Thank you for the response.
I wonder if the configure or make process should defend against the possibility
that the host compiler and the compiler that we are building today have
differing defaults for -m3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #3 from john henning ---
Rainer points out that a key here seems to be that the host system compiler had
been configured with sparcv9-solaris2.11 but the 8.2.0 build did not request
the same. In my case, the host system compiler was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
john henning changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mailboxnotfound at yahoo dot
com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
So that means host gcc 7 when defaulting to -m64 miscompiles stage1 in a way
that it miscompiles stage2 but that miscompilation does not affect stage3.
That'll be "interesting" to track down :/
16 matches
Mail list logo
