> Dennis Clarke <dcla...@blastwave.org> writes: > >>> The only caveat are strange errors with gmake: >>> >>> make[3]: write error >>> >>> See CR 6938116 GNU make highly unreliable: `write error' message. >>> >>> I've hacked around this by ignoring the error in misc.c (close_stdout) >>> ;-) >>> >> >> It seems odd that gmake would pass every test in its own testsuite and >> then get an odd little message like that. Oh well, if you feel it can be > > It only happens once in a while, and primarily for Solaris 11 NFS > servers. Even more rarely, it occurs on Solaris 11 locally.
I generally build my prod things on Solaris 8 with the assumption that the Solaris ABI stability will provide what I need up to Solaris 9. Then I rebuild again on Solaris 10 for AMD64/x86_64 functionality. This has worked well thus far. I avoid Solaris 11 Express entirely as I just don't see it as a valid release yet. If the OpenSolaris project was still alive and the bug process was open then I'd may feel differently but with thing being as they are ... I avoid Sol 11 for now. > >> ignored then I'm so very happy to see this. > > I think it is harmless enough to be ignored in this particular case, but > this deviation from pre-S11 behaviour is bad. Suddenly expecting every > single piece of software to handle EINTR all over the place when you > didn't need to before and don't need it on any other platform isn't > exactly a winning proposition to me ;-( I'll try to pursue this with > Solaris engineering. How is that going ? I have filed bugs in the past regarding Studio 11 Update 1 and was not exactly thrilled with the response. However .. dropping an email to Daryl Gove can generally get things moving. >> By the way, I just want to say thank you for posting results on Solaris >> because I review them and use them for comparison all the time. I am >> still >> fascinated that GCC can post different results on two servers running >> the >> same OS and probably with the same revs of tools avail. >> >> Consider this on Sol 8 i386 : >> >> === gcc Summary === >> >> # of expected passes 72652 >> # of unexpected failures 18 >> # of expected failures 212 >> # of unresolved testcases 1 >> # of unsupported tests 1874 >> /opt/bw/src/GCC/gcc-4.6.0_SunOS5.8_i386.001/gcc/xgcc version 4.6.0 >> (Blastwave.org Inc. Mon Mar 28 13:18:17 GMT 2011) >> >> This : http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg02832.html >> >> === gcc Summary === >> >> # of expected passes 74529 >> # of unexpected failures 1 >> # of expected failures 212 >> # of unresolved testcases 1 >> # of unsupported tests 1031 >> /var/gcc/gcc-4.6.0/8-gcc-gas/gcc/xgcc version 4.6.0 (GCC) > > One would have to compare gcc.sum in detail to know what's going on. > Well my testsuite run with N=2 finished and the results look like : http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg03106.html === gcc Summary === # of expected passes 72652 # of unexpected failures 18 # of expected failures 212 # of unresolved testcases 1 # of unsupported tests 1874 /opt/bw/src/GCC/gcc-4.6.0_SunOS5.8_i386.001/gcc/xgcc version 4.6.0 (Blastwave.org Inc. Mon Mar 28 13:18:17 GMT 2011) Exact same as before ! This is a very good sign. OKay .. so my days of running gmake -k check as a single thread are over. Thank you very much! >> I decided to toss caution to the wind and run my build with as and ld in >> /usr/ccs/bin and I was happy to see a decent result set. I often wonder >> if >> we *need* GNU as or just *want* GNU as in an older Solaris release like >> 8. > > IMO you want gas on Solaris/x86 before 10 because as lacks several > features there (like visibility support). On Solaris 10/x86 and up, as > is mostly fine (primarily COMDAT group support is missing, but I'm > working on that with the assembler and linker engineers as we speak). > Unfortunately, a recent as patch broke several -gstabs tests, but this > is expected to be fixed soon. > > On Solaris/SPARC I usually do the production builds with as; there seems > little reason to go for gas instead. > > Hope this helps. Very much so, thank you. I'll go back and rebuild on x86 with gas and leave my Sparc build as is. I generally do a double bootstrap merely to see what happens when GCC 4.6.0 is built with GCC 4.6.0 after it has already been bootstrapped. If I see any significant changes in the testsuite results then I assume something funky is afoot. -- Dennis Clarke dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
