Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60925&edit=1
ID: 60925 User updated by: tg at debian dot org Reported by: tg at debian dot org Summary: fpm_atomic.h says unknown processor (m68k) -Status: Feedback +Status: Open Type: Bug Package: Compile Failure Operating System: Linux PHP Version: 5.3.9 Block user comment: N Private report: N New Comment: gcc version 4.6.2 (Debian 4.6.2-12) I know for sure it does NOT support __sync_* atomic builtins; on m68k, gcc-4.7 will introduce them, and a backport is not likely (I looked at it, but it depends on mach-indep changes that arenât in 4.6 and I fear to break other things by that). Several other architectures also do not have support for them (but I can only sort-of speak for m68k at the moment). Do I still need to try building a vanilla tarball with this information? Previous Comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2012-01-30 12:24:51] ahar...@php.net This isn't a regression in PHP as such, as the Debian 5.3.3-7 package had a patch specifically to use gcc's atomic builtins where available. A modified version of that patch was brought upstream in the fix for bug #52407 and released in 5.3.4. Can you please try building a vanilla PHP tarball? It would also be helpful to get the version of gcc you're running and the bit of config.log including and immediately following the line "checking if gcc supports __sync_bool_compare_and_swap". ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2012-01-29 19:31:04] tg at debian dot org Description: ------------ /tmp/buildd/php5-5.3.9/sapi/fpm/fpm/fpm_atomic.h:142:2: error: #error Unsupported processor. Please open a bug report (bugs.php.net). This is on: Linux ara5.mirbsd.org 3.2.0-1+m68k.1-atari #1 Mon Jan 23 06:44:50 UTC 2012 m68k GNU/Linux php5_5.3.3-7 compiled, so this is a regression. Test script: --------------- dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -B ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60925&edit=1
