--- Comment #39 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 09:53
---
I've also been poking at MPFR. There are apparently 10 or more patches now
for
2.2.0, that may resolve the issues, too. I'll look at that. I've rebuilt it,
and ran the check area for mpfr, and 115/117
--- Comment #40 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 10:54
---
This is the build with GMP 4.1.3 and MPFR 2.2.0:
gax% gcc/xgcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
Configured with: /home/eric/svn/gcc-4_0-branch/configure
--prefix=/opt/build/eric/local/gcc
--- Comment #25 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 14:05
---
Confirmed on Solaris 7, 8 and 9, everything is fine on Solaris 10.
Three functions are missing:
conftest.cc:75: error: '::wcstold' has not been declared
conftest.cc:76: error: '::wcstoll' has not been
--- Comment #20 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 14:09
---
Of the 3 workarounds in comment #17, bootstrap with Sun cc doesn't work
because of PR 18058 (although there is a patch posted for that PR). Also
bootstrap with GCC 2.x or 3.x isn't quite right since I tried
--- Comment #22 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 14:36
---
Huh? The third comment in 26507 (by you I might add) agrees that PR 26507 and
this one are the same problem. We should close one as a dup of the other.
I precisely chose not to close either because
--- Comment #23 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 14:44
---
My hope is that this PR will get more attention. We can't IMHO release 4.2
with this problem still there, and it was filed in October.
Oh, and feel free to take a stab at it. :-) Part of the problem
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 15:01
---
I'm about to post a fix.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-01 17:10
---
Is transfer_array_intrinsic_1.f90 portable to big-endian? It fails on SPARC.
Reduced testcase:
integer(4) :: y(4)
character(4) :: ch(4)
y = (/(i + ishft (i + 1, 8) + ishft (i + 2, 16
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-01 20:05
---
No, it isn't portable to big endian. How are you executing this
test.
gmake -k check-fortran. :-)
I added a { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } to the dg-do clause.
Not on the 4.1 branch. And why
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-01 21:34
---
Subject: Bug 24685
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sat Apr 1 21:34:27 2006
New Revision: 112611
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112611
Log:
PR libfortran/24685
* gfortran.dg
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-01 21:35
---
Subject: Bug 24685
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sat Apr 1 21:35:34 2006
New Revision: 112612
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112612
Log:
PR libfortran/24685
* gfortran.dg
--- Comment #18 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-02 06:21
---
We already had this discussion and yes it is not portable but that has already
been fixed.
Andrew, you should really double-check what you say...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/svn/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite
--- Comment #20 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-02 06:36
---
Does not matter, file a new bug about the testcase failing since this is only
the testcase.
Please stop being so stubborn. :-) Anyway, I now hold you responsible for
making sure that something is done about
--- Comment #21 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-02 06:38
---
Oops! I didn't mean to reopen it again...
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 13:11
---
Thanks for reporting the problem and the patch, I'll take care of it.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 21:03
---
Subject: Bug 27023
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Apr 4 21:03:05 2006
New Revision: 112679
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112679
Log:
PR bootstrap/27023
* Makefile.tpl
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 21:04
---
Subject: Bug 27023
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Apr 4 21:04:37 2006
New Revision: 112680
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112680
Log:
PR bootstrap/27023
* Makefile.tpl
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 21:07
---
Fixed on 4.0 and 4.1 branch, mainline is not affected.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 13:35
---
As can be seen from the configure options, this is with GNU
binutils 2.16.1.
What's the configure shell? What's the version of GNU make? What's the
bootstrap compiler?
I also tried the Sun assembler
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 13:57
---
(that's from GNAT 3.15p, binary distribution from AdaCore; but the
compiler used to build strstream.cc is ./xgcc, i.e. GCC 4.1.0
built in stage1. And, as I said, the same errors occur with
--enable-bootstrap
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 15:47
---
The bootstrap then completes successfully.
Wunderbar. :-)
So: make fails, make bootstrap works, but the commands
invoked are identical. Could it be that gcc 2.8.1 silently
miscompiled cc1plus in the case
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-10 08:50
---
I have configured gcc-4.1.0 with the following command:
configure --enable-threads --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-bootstrap
--with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld
Do not use --enable-bootstrap, it has not been
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-10 15:55
---
config.status: creating libada-mk
config.status: creating auto-host.h
config.status: executing default commands
Bootstrapping the compiler
gmake[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/gcc-4.1.0/gcc'
gmake[1
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-11 06:06
---
Sorry, the patch doesn't seem to help at all.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-12 09:06
---
This is known to work, please make sure to read carefully the instructions at
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#x-x-solaris2
In particular, use the recommended config shell and do not build
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-12 09:09
---
Presumably fixed everywhere.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #23 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-18 17:36
---
It looks like there was a C testcase, which has now been fixed; is there still
an issue for languages other than Ada?
I presume you meant is there still an issue for languages where everything is
addressable
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 10:22
---
David, do you plan on proceeding with your suggestion of disabling the power
multilib for 4.1.1? The compiler still cannot be bootstrapped on AIX 5.1.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #29 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 19:03
---
Fixed (again), for 4.1.1.
Confirmed for all Solaris versions = 7 on 4.1 branch and mainline, thanks
again.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6702
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 20:06
---
I was waiting for feedback from the original reporter, which never was
supplied. I have committed the patch on mainline to the 4.1 branch. I do not
have access to an AIX 5.1 system and without more details
--- Comment #17 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 23:12
---
That was fast!
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-06 11:42
---
Patches should be posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #27 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-06 11:46
---
For sparc/sparc64 linux, the status for 4.2 20060503, from here,
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-05/msg00223.html, is this:
Thanks, but this PR is for Solaris so avoid posting results for Linux
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-06 12:14
---
what's the status of this one?
Unchanged according to my testing:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/svn/gcc/gcc uname -a
Linux linux 2.6.8-24-default #1 Wed Oct 6 09:16:23 UTC 2004 x86_64 x86_64
x86_64 GNU/Linux
[EMAIL
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-11 05:39
---
I can disable section anchors for Ada, similar to Objective C and Objective
C++, but this failure likely means that there is a bug in the Trees generated
by GNU Ada.
It's only a wild guess until someone first
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 18:55
---
Patch in preparation.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot|unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org
--- Comment #25 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-15 05:36
---
(I've not fully understood the discussion here, but if everything in Ada is
addressable, then it seems to me that everything should have TREE_ADDRESSABLE
set.)
Grumpf... you read a little too quickly
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-17 06:31
---
I cannot reproduce on the SPARC/Solaris 9 machine I use. Please provide as
many details as you can on the OS, the linker, the assembler, GCC, GDB and so
on.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-17 18:10
---
I'm told that the fault is due to a known problem in the Sun libc:
6372620 printstack() segfaults when called from static function
It this doesn't provide sufficient detail to work around the bug in gcc
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-17 20:40
---
Maybe it's one of the runtime library functions that's static (maybe _start?).
Excerpt from gcc/config/sparc/sol2-c1.asm:
.section.text
.proc 022
.global _start
_start
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 05:52
---
Here is the test case from that bug report:
I gather than compiling with -fPIC and/or calling printstack from a shared
library is necessary to trigger the bug, which is not what you reported. At
this point
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-20 06:01
---
I note that the versions of GMP MPFR I'm using work *fine* on linux, so I
consider them known good. They only don't work with Solaris.
I definitely cannot reproduce this problem either.
--
http
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-28 09:18
---
Confirmed, Gigi is not prepared for this kind of circularity.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 11:11
---
I've just tried to bootstrap the trunk configured for i586-pc-linux-gnu, and
the failures I got in the Ada testsuite were:
*** FAILURES: c35507m c954020 cd2a23e cdd2a02 cxh1001
c954020 is very likely one
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 11:15
---
In addition not to configuring with --enable-bootstrap, also avoid tuning the
compiler for HyperSPARC, nobody uses that nowadays, it's largely untested.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 17:47
---
I'm trying to bootstrap gcc without --enable-bootstrap (I have not seen in the
documentation that this option was deprecated) and wihtout any HyperSPARC
optimization.
It's the other way around, --enable
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 18:57
---
/home/bertrand/gcc-4.1.1/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/bertrand/gcc-4.1.1/build/./gcc/ -B/opt/sparc-sun-solaris2.9/bin/
-B/opt/sparc-sun-solaris2.9/lib/ -isystem /opt/sparc-sun-solaris2.9/include
-isystem /opt
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 19:40
---
I have seen the same mistake with gcc 4.1.1 on a dual HyperSPARC running
Solaris 9. GMP MPFR are good (tested with make check).
This has something to do with GMP MPFR. Make sure they are built as 32-bit
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-31 21:25
---
I have configured gcc with:
lebegue:[~/gcc-4.1.1/build] ../configure --prefix=/opt
--enable-threads=posix
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,java --with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld
--with-mpfr=/opt --disable
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-01 19:14
---
azuma% grep maxssiz /stand/system
tunable maxssiz 16777216
azuma% swapinfo
Kb Kb Kb PCT START/ Kb
TYPE AVAILUSEDFREE USED LIMIT RESERVE PRI NAME
dev 4194304
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-02 20:32
---
Eric, any idea?
I presume the message means that the functions are not declared in wchar.h?
I do have both in wchar.h on the IRIX machine:
__SGI_LIBC_USING_FROM_STD(wcstok)
__SGI_LIBC_USING_FROM_STD(wcsftime
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-02 21:18
---
An IRIX64 system here has wchar.h with the __SGI_LIBC_USING_FROM_STD(wcstok),
but it failed in the fortran part! :-(
That's it: puar% uname -s
IRIX64
I've not tried to build the Fortran compiler
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-04 18:12
---
Isn't this just a duplicate of 23541? We have it marked as depending on
23541,
but why keep both open?
It essentially is, but this one is much more severe since there is no
workaround.
On it's own, I'd
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-05 14:06
---
Investigating Roger's patch again:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-05/msg01249.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 06:19
---
The idea of this patch seems OK, but let's find a way to avoid duplicating the
declare_tmp_vars code, perhaps by making another small routine to find the
outermost BIND_EXPR in a function?
Do you really want
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-09 09:06
---
I ran into it some time ago too.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-09 09:08
---
Confirmed, this happens when the compiler is configured for SJLJ exceptions.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 15:43
---
But this seems not to be the case here:
% grep -i except gcc/auto-host.h
/* Define 0/1 to force the choice for exception handling model. */
/* #undef CONFIG_SJLJ_EXCEPTIONS */
Right, it's another kind
--- Comment #34 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 15:44
---
Issues in general are not specific enough. The question is, do we still have
a
regression here.
Read the subject...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18058
--- Comment #37 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 20:58
---
Re. comment #34: Read comment #31. If one bug is used for (at least) two
different problems, confusion is what you get.
My understanding is that there is a unique underlying problem.
Anyway, your patch
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 18:11
---
Ok, I see. Thanks for the explanation. Any reason this is done this way?
Solaris/SPARC doesn't use this, nor does Linux/x86, so it seems like both
the Solaris and x86 parts of the code are there.
Short
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-13 08:55
---
Subject: Bug 26754
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Jun 13 08:55:40 2006
New Revision: 114605
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114605
Log:
PR debug/26754
* gimplify.c
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-13 08:56
---
Fixed on mainline.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-15 06:39
---
I don't understand the assertion, given that removing it seems to generate
correct output for this test case. Since you edited this code not to long
ago,
do you have thoughts?
Not really. I've only
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-15 12:34
---
I fixed this problem. But, as I don't have a Solaris box,
I can't test whether this means that the build works.
This report was actually invalid, we don't support /bin/sh on Solaris.
--
ebotcazou at gcc
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-15 12:36
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#x-x-solaris2
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-16 09:24
---
My simple question is why not support /bin/sh on Solaris?
Because we're not in the business of working around bugs in antiquated shells.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28024
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-20 06:06
---
Subject: Bug 18692
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Jun 20 06:06:50 2006
New Revision: 114804
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114804
Log:
PR ada/18692
* Make-lang.in: Add check
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-20 06:20
---
Subject: Bug 18692
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Jun 20 06:20:37 2006
New Revision: 114805
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114805
Log:
PR ada/18692
* lib/gnat.exp: New file
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-20 06:24
---
The harness has been installed on mainline.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-21 18:12
---
Ok, thanks for the explanation. But right now, the FSF tree has M_F_F_S_F
definitions for neither Solaris/SPARC nor /x86, AFAIKT. And Solaris/SPARC
and Solaris/SPARCv9 can turn on ZCX and are thus unaffected
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-24 14:54
---
The problem appears to be caused by the change of semantics of const_binop in
this patch:
2005-11-16 Eric Botcazou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* fold-const.c (const_binop): Don't constant fold
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-25 17:16
---
Subject: Bug 28151
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sun Jun 25 17:16:25 2006
New Revision: 114992
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114992
Log:
PR middle-end/28151
* fold-const.c
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-25 17:18
---
Subject: Bug 28151
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sun Jun 25 17:18:00 2006
New Revision: 114993
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114993
Log:
PR middle-end/28151
* fold-const.c
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-25 17:19
---
Fixed everywhere.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #38 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-04 07:52
---
Subject: Bug 18058
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Jul 4 07:52:47 2006
New Revision: 115172
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=115172
Log:
PR bootstrap/18058
* configure.in: Add
--- Comment #39 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-04 07:54
---
Thanks a bunch to Geoff!
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-04 14:35
---
$ ./configure --prefix=/home/gcc --enable-threads=solaris
--enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-shared=libstdc++ --disable-multilib
--disable-nls sparc64-sun-solaris2.9
First of all, building in the source
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-04 17:01
---
Confirmed on SPARC/Solaris 8 and 9, 32-bit and 64-bit.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-07 13:00
---
I think the Alpha back-end somewhat abuses the builtin machinery here.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-07 13:01
---
However we are nice people and the Ada front-end will be change to cope with
it.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: ia64-hp-hpux11.23
GCC host triplet: ia64-hp-hpux11.23
GCC target triplet: ia64-hp-hpux11.23
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-08 21:45
---
Strange, this works for me with CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/ksh on Solaris 8, 9 and 10:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-07/msg00356.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-07/msg00357.html
http
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-08 22:16
---
Duplicate of target/28084?!?
Very likely. I must admit I only searched the database with ia64-hp.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #22 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-11 20:01
---
This most likely explains the difference: this is before C99 support was
introduced, and obviously most testers use relatively recent IRIX
releases.
Mine is 6.5 6.5.26m.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-14 09:14
---
The test case is the build of gcc 4.0.3 on Solaris 8, including the
libstdc++.so build.
This is known to work, e.g. http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/buildstat.html
env LD_LIBRARY_PATH=path-where-libgcc_s.so-is ldd
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-14 14:08
---
Ok, the compile is done. In gcc/Makefile.in, I changed
-DLOCAL_INCLUDE_DIR=\$(local_includedir)\ \
to
-ULOCAL_INCLUDE_DIR \
so that /usr/local/include is NOT searched by default by the preprocessor
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-15 20:39
---
Eric, do you have any new information on this problem? I cannot reproduce it.
I'm totally at a loss. I don't have any working debugger on the machine, the
system debugger enters an infinite loop:
azuma% /usr
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-03 08:37
---
Is this really such a big deal? Solaris uses DWARF, and so does Apple now.
Sure, as far as Solaris is concerned, end of the story. But other platforms
are stuck with STABS (Tru64, HP-UX). And it seems
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-04 21:36
---
A mainline bootstrap as of 20060724 was successful, so it seems so
(although I haven't seen a specific fix addressing this issue).
This is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-07/msg00229.html and I asked
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-06 06:43
---
Configured gcc with CFLAGS=-xarch=v9 (among other flags) to produce 64-bit
code from the system compiler, instead of the default of 32-bit.
(begin build log excerpt)
cc -c -g -DENABLE_CHECKING
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-06 06:58
---
Firstly, using /bin/sh to build the compiler is unsupported on Solaris. Please
read http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#x-x-solaris2
Secondly, this works for everyone else so there's maybe something
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-06 07:02
---
Known problem.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-06 07:34
---
No, I'm trying to build a 64-bit GCC using cc in 64-bit mode (as per CFLAGS)
on
a 64-bit system. Nothing fancy here.
Sure, but you're not using the correct procedure. Use the first I posted.
You don't
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-06 08:46
---
How is it any worse than having those flags in CC? CC and CFLAGS are always
supposed to be used together anyway---the only difference with what you're
describing is that this follows the standard variable
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-06 08:48
---
That's a fairly slippery slope. Does -KPIC/-fPIC/etc. make cc a different
compiler? -g/-O? -g/-pg? (Yes, the linker might be able to handle those
combinations, but you may end up with a Frankenbinary
501 - 600 of 2613 matches
Mail list logo
