On 17/03/2017 10:58, Gedare Bloom wrote:
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:22 PM, Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2017 07:48, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org
<mailto:chr...@rtems.org>> wrote:
On 17/03/2017 01:06, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 4:43 AM, Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org
<mailto:chr...@rtems.org>
<mailto:chr...@rtems.org <mailto:chr...@rtems.org>>> wrote:
If you have anything you would like in the release please
make sure you
have created a ticket and assigned it to the milestone.
Are the 4.11 tools buildable on the newer hosts that you and I
have had troubles with the 4.12 tools? I think specifically
qemu and gdb are troublesome.
Good point, I am not sure. I will check FreeBSD 11.0 and raise a
ticket if there is a problem.
FWIW assuming qemu on the master is the same as on 4.11, it built find
on a new CentOS 7 install.
I do not know if they are the same. I will check what there is in 4.11 on
FreeBSD 10.3 and 11.0.
But that's still at gcc 4.8. Something with a new
enough gcc will have trouble.
If tickets are raised and patches supplied in time they may make RC1
otherwise they will have to wait for the next release.
Agreed.
And you have the gdb powerpc issue on FreeBSD which might occur.
Is there a ticket for this? I am struggling to remember what the problem
is. I do not use any PPC devices and it is not a primary focus for me.
You couldn't build powerpc gdb because of the error symbol. There was
something
Ah yes something in the simulator is referencing a C symbol when it will
now be a C++ symbol, ie missing include somewhere. I wonder if this is a
clang vs gcc issue. This was using the latest gdb so I will see if it is
a problem with the 4.11 gdb.
with max_align_t but I think that got resolved.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21206
Yes, and this is fixed on 4.12 (master). I may need to backport the fix.
It is isolated to FreeBSD hosts so a low impact fix.
I don't know of any code issues. We all are good at filing those. :)
I would like to package and release what we have at the set dates rather
than hold the release while everything possible is fixed.
+1
4.12 should be on the table, too
This need some more discussion before a date is set so maybe another
thread. It is an important question and raises some roadmap related
questions.
Chris
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
