I am trying to build a GCC (version 4.9.3)cross compiler on my windows
machine using Cygwin. I am using the source package that came along
with cygwin.
I have already built binutils version 2.25 and installed, this is
through cygwin as well.
binutils configuration used:
../binutils-x.y.z/configu
Hi,
I am trying to build GCC 4.8 snapshot. Has anyone done this, if so
which versions of GCC do I have to build to get there ?
Many thanks in advance,
Aaron
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygw
Dave Korn writes:
> On 20/04/2010 20:28, Paul Bibbings wrote:
>
>> (BTW. I'm guessing by "That'd be my fault" that you're working on gcc
>> upstream?)
>
> I certainly am; my long-term goal is a) to synchronize upstream and
> downstream so that in the end there are no cygwin-specific patches ne
On 20/04/2010 20:28, Paul Bibbings wrote:
> (BTW. I'm guessing by "That'd be my fault" that you're working on gcc
> upstream?)
I certainly am; my long-term goal is a) to synchronize upstream and
downstream so that in the end there are no cygwin-specific patches needed and
anyone can just build
Dave Korn writes:
> On 17/04/2010 21:32, Paul Bibbings wrote:
>
>> The .dlls in question are:
>>
>> 21:10:29 Paul bibbi...@jijou
>> ~ $ls -l /opt/gcc-4.5.0/bin | grep dll
>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 ... 437743 Apr 15 09:08 cyggcc_s-1.dll
>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 ... 271146 Apr 15 09:08 cyggomp-1.dl
On 17/04/2010 21:32, Paul Bibbings wrote:
> The .dlls in question are:
>
> 21:10:29 Paul bibbi...@jijou
> ~ $ls -l /opt/gcc-4.5.0/bin | grep dll
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 ... 437743 Apr 15 09:08 cyggcc_s-1.dll
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 ... 271146 Apr 15 09:08 cyggomp-1.dll
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 ... 55
Jerry DeLisle writes:
> I have not had any problems building with Cygwin 1.7 on WinNT or Win7.
> You do have to make sure you have the mpc complex math library
> installed. Other than that I have had no problems.
>
> Jerry
I've had no problems with the build itself, as far as I can tell. The
is
Paul Bibbings wrote:
Whilst I do use the versions of gcc available as Cygwin packages, I have
also successfully built from source and used other versions. Most
recently I have added gcc-4.4.1, 4.4.3 and a 4.5.0 snapshot (end of Feb
2010). I configure them to build and install in /opt/gcc-{versi
"Larry Hall (Cygwin)" writes:
> On 4/15/2010 2:26 PM, Paul Bibbings wrote:
>> Can I, then, do the same with the .dlls in question? Is it possible,
>> for instance, for .dlls to be loadable via symlinks under Cygwin?
>
> No. The Windows loader does not recognize Cygwin symlinks. Actually,
> not
On 4/15/2010 2:26 PM, Paul Bibbings wrote:
Can I, then, do the same with the .dlls in question? Is it possible,
for instance, for .dlls to be loadable via symlinks under Cygwin?
No. The Windows loader does not recognize Cygwin symlinks. Actually,
nothing in Windows does. ;-)
--
Larry Hall
Whilst I do use the versions of gcc available as Cygwin packages, I have
also successfully built from source and used other versions. Most
recently I have added gcc-4.4.1, 4.4.3 and a 4.5.0 snapshot (end of Feb
2010). I configure them to build and install in /opt/gcc-{version}. I
then incorporate
2009/8/6 Dave Korn :
> Aaron Gray wrote:
>> Anyone got a clue ?
>
> Shouldn't be needed. configure scripts should just find /bin/ar and use
> that.
>
> How did you configure everything?
I told a lie I am actually using llvm-gcc so there maybe some differences.
I compiled gcc-4.2.2 fine.
Sorr
Aaron Gray wrote:
> Anyone got a clue ?
Shouldn't be needed. configure scripts should just find /bin/ar and use that.
How did you configure everything?
cheers,
DaveK
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documenta
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 09:57:59PM +0100, Aaron Gray wrote:
>Anyone got a clue ?
Yes.
cgf
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubs
Anyone got a clue ?
Aaron
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to NightStrike on 9/9/2008 7:08 AM:
>>> "... building where objdir is a subdirectory of srcdir is unsupported."
>>
>> I have been building gcc like that (and also in a completely separate
>> directory) f
this. I do it all of the time.
>>>
>>> It is unsupported:
>>>
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html
>>>
>>> "... building where objdir is a subdirectory of srcdir is unsupported."
>>
>> What's that? An actual reference to
e's no reason not to do this. I do it all of the time.
>>
>> It is unsupported:
>>
>>http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html
>>
>>"... building where objdir is a subdirectory of srcdir is unsupported."
>
> What's that? An actual refere
all/configure.html
>
>"... building where objdir is a subdirectory of srcdir is unsupported."
What's that? An actual reference to a definitive source? Do you think
that will ever catch on?
I have been building gcc like that (and also in a completely separate
directory) for many
Christopher Faylor wrote on 08 September 2008 22:48:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 09:43:37PM +, Jay wrote:
>> You can build gcc 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 just fine from the existing Cygwin gcc
>> 3.x package.
>>
>> The error also /appeared/ to have the object directory under the source
>> directory. Don
Jay wrote on 08 September 2008 22:44:
> If you /really/ want to go through intermediate versions,
> then just remove -disable-bootstrap.
I'd highly recommend always building a full bootstrap, but of course it does
take longer.
> Or build twice, should be about the same thing:
I wouldn't
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 09:43:37PM +, Jay wrote:
>You can build gcc 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 just fine from the existing Cygwin
>gcc 3.x package.
>
>The error also /appeared/ to have the object directory under the source
>directory. Don't do that.
Huh? There's no reason not to do this. I do it all o
You can build gcc 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 just fine from the existing Cygwin gcc 3.x
package.
The error also /appeared/ to have the object directory under the source
directory. Don't do that.
I use roughly:
mkdir /obj/gcc.1
cd /obj/gcc.1
/src/gcc/configure -disable-nls -disable-boo
Thank you, Tatsuro Matsuoka,
Following Brian Dessent's advice, I have reinstalled Cygwin in binary
(Unix) file mode. Under that rendition of Cygwin, the gcc 4.3.2 build
ran to completion. The resulting GCC looks promising, although I have
not yet tested it extensively.
Best,
Werner
P.S.: My apo
Tatsuro MATSUOKA wrote:
> Hello Werner Wothke
>
> My suggestin is non-sense from logical sense but is a success story to build
> gcc-4.3.2.
>
> I have tried with gcc-3.4.4-3 on cygwin, the same error appeared.
> I have compliled from gcc 4.3.2 (only C, C++, Fortran) from gcc 4.3.1, there
> occu
Hello Werner Wothke
My suggestin is non-sense from logical sense but is a success story to build
gcc-4.3.2.
I have tried with gcc-3.4.4-3 on cygwin, the same error appeared.
I have compliled from gcc 4.3.2 (only C, C++, Fortran) from gcc 4.3.1, there
occured no problems.
To my knowledge 4.2
Werner Wothke wrote:
> $ make
> [ -f stage_final ] || echo stage3 > stage_final
> make[1]: Entering directory `/cygdrive/c/gcc-4.3.2/Destination'
> -bubble'. Stop.rule to make target `stage3
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/cygdrive/c/gcc-4.3.2/Destination'
> make: *** [all] Error 2
The overlapped
I am trying to build gcc 4.3.2 because I ran into an apparent bug with
gcc 3.4.4. On my present cygwin (1.5.25) system, I have installed gmp
and mpfr.
I downloaded and extracted GCC 4.3.2 and ran ../configure inside a new
target directory. However, when I run make inside that directory,
NO MAT
Dave Korn wrote:
[...] toiletless[*] in this matter.
[...]
[*] - Y'know. Nothing to go on.
snicker
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb http://del.icio.us/steve.holden
-
On 20 August 2007 22:53, Aaron Gray wrote:
Why is it different from gcc-4.2.0's ?
Okay I am kicking myself now many hours wasted it was because I used a
Windows program WinRAR to unpack my work rather than using tar !!!
It was a permissions problem afterall.
Very sorry for poluting your mail
On 20 August 2007 22:53, Aaron Gray wrote:
>> Why is it different from gcc-4.2.0's ?
>
> Okay I am kicking myself now many hours wasted it was because I used a
> Windows program WinRAR to unpack my work rather than using tar !!!
>
> It was a permissions problem afterall.
>
> Very sorry for polu
Why is it different from gcc-4.2.0's ?
Okay I am kicking myself now many hours wasted it was because I used a
Windows program WinRAR to unpack my work rather than using tar !!!
It was a permissions problem afterall.
Very sorry for poluting your mailing list.
Regards,
Aaron
--
Unsubscribe
Okay getfacl is reporting 'user::---' rather than 'user::rwx' for depcomp on
my patched version of GCC.
This leads to two questions ...
How do I modify this to be correct ?
Why is it different from gcc-4.2.0's ?
Thanks for bearing with me.
Aaron
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/
Ignore the previous post depcomp is under src/gcc-4.2.0 not build/gcc-4.2.0
!
Sorry to mess you about. I'll get some ACL results now ...
Aaron
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http:
Okay I printed out '$am_depcomp' which was effectivly
'gcc4.2.0/libcpp/../depcomp' and put an 'exit' at (effective) line 2888 and
the file gcc4.2.0/depcomp does not seem to exist.
Very strange as I found 'depcomp' before previously and its printing 'line:
2888: ./depcomp: permisssion denied' r
Aaron Gray wrote:
A Windows text editor called Zeus.
That's it. I bet the problem disappears if you use a Cygwin text editor
such as vim.
When a native Windows app creates a file, it usually does not do
anything special with the ACL, so it gets whatever the default
inheritable permissions of
Aaron Gray wrote:
> A Windows text editor called Zeus.
That's it. I bet the problem disappears if you use a Cygwin text editor
such as vim.
When a native Windows app creates a file, it usually does not do
anything special with the ACL, so it gets whatever the default
inheritable permissions of
On 20 August 2007 19:13, Aaron Gray wrote:
>> On 20 August 2007 18:16, Aaron Gray wrote:
>>> Hopefully I shall get to the bottom of it if I perservere, but any help or
>>> suggestions are welcome.
>>
>> Well, why don't you actually *look* at those perms, instead of asking people
>> who have no
On 20 August 2007 18:16, Aaron Gray wrote:
Unmodified GCC 4.2.0 compiles okay, but when modified cracks appear,
only
on Vista though, XP is okay. So must be something to do with
permissions.
So, what tool did you use to 'modify' it?
A Windows text editor called Zeus.
I have been altering
On 20 August 2007 18:16, Aaron Gray wrote:
>>> Unmodified GCC 4.2.0 compiles okay, but when modified cracks appear, only
>>> on Vista though, XP is okay. So must be something to do with permissions.
>>
>> So, what tool did you use to 'modify' it?
>
> A Windows text editor called Zeus.
>
> I ha
On 20 August 2007 17:42, Aaron Gray wrote:
On Aug 20 16:20, Dave Korn wrote:
BTW, you didn't by any chance use winzip to unpack the tarball did
you?
No.
Just checking. Windoze tools don't generally do the right thing for
cygwin's emulation of posix perms.
Apart from that, the file p
On 20 August 2007 17:42, Aaron Gray wrote:
>> On Aug 20 16:20, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> BTW, you didn't by any chance use winzip to unpack the tarball did you?
>
> No.
Just checking. Windoze tools don't generally do the right thing for
cygwin's emulation of posix perms.
>> Apart from that, th
On Aug 20 16:20, Dave Korn wrote:
On 20 August 2007 15:49, Aaron Gray wrote:
>>> On 19 August 2007 20:22, Aaron Gray wrote:
> AFACT this actually looks like a Vista problem.
> [...]
Hm, that sounds like a file that you have write but not delete
permissions
to.
> Can someone look into this plea
On Aug 20 16:20, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 20 August 2007 15:49, Aaron Gray wrote:
> >>> On 19 August 2007 20:22, Aaron Gray wrote:
> > AFACT this actually looks like a Vista problem.
> > [...]
> Hm, that sounds like a file that you have write but not delete permissions
> to.
>
> > Can someone look
On 20 August 2007 15:49, Aaron Gray wrote:
>>> On 19 August 2007 20:22, Aaron Gray wrote:
>> Now I having a problem with libcpp getting the error :-
>>
>>checking dependancy style of gcc...
>> /usr/src/gcc-4.2.0/libcpp/configure: line 2887: ./depcomp: premission
>> denied.
>
> AFACT this act
On 19 August 2007 20:22, Aaron Gray wrote:
Now I having a problem with libcpp getting the error :-
checking dependancy style of gcc...
/usr/src/gcc-4.2.0/libcpp/configure: line 2887: ./depcomp: premission
denied.
AFACT this actually looks like a Vista problem.
I replaced line 2875 with :
On 19 August 2007 20:22, Aaron Gray wrote:
On building GCC on Vista I am getting a permissions error on building
'intl'
with 'libintl.h' being unaccessable.
Any insights or help welcomed,
Welcome to the Cywin Package List:
http://cygwin.com/packages/
Do you have
On 19 August 2007 20:22, Aaron Gray wrote:
> On building GCC on Vista I am getting a permissions error on building 'intl'
> with 'libintl.h' being unaccessable.
>
> Any insights or help welcomed,
Welcome to the Cywin Package List:
http://cygwin.com/pa
On building GCC on Vista I am getting a permissions error on building 'intl'
with 'libintl.h' being unaccessable.
Any insights or help welcomed,
Aaron
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problem
Shankar Unni wrote:
> You already see the effects of this in the Linux world, with the more
> recent distributions having to ship a set of compat_libgcc_blah packages
> for each major (ABI-incompatible) previous release going back (they're
> on 4.1/4.2 these days, and there's one for 3.3 and one f
Brian Dessent wrote:
Does this mean that we'll start to libgcc_s.dll's sprouting like
mushrooms in the install dirs of various apps, or in *gasp*
%WINDIR%/system32 over the coming years? Is this library versioned at
all? What about conflicts?
You already see the effects of this in the Linux
Charles Wilson wrote:
> > Are we really going to tell them that there is no choice in the matter,
> > that if they want cross-.so EH they must suffer shared libraries?
>
> Yes. Microsoft does the same thing. They just have an inside advantage
> in supplying their runtime with the OS.
>
> > The
Brian Dessent wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
C++ exceptions across DLL boundaries [*]
This also affects java. It is /NOT/ solved in 4.2, nor svn trunk. The
Official Way Forward is to get shared runtimes working...which explains
my patch-in-progress, above.
For the MinGW community for sure
Charles Wilson wrote:
> C++ exceptions across DLL boundaries [*]
> This also affects java. It is /NOT/ solved in 4.2, nor svn trunk. The
> Official Way Forward is to get shared runtimes working...which explains
> my patch-in-progress, above.
For the MinGW community for sure, and for the Cyg
Charles Wilson wrote:
> So, I thought I'd post my experiences, which ultimately resulted in a
> fully bootstrapped native cygwin compiler, with c,c++,objc,fortran,java
> frontends.
Many thanks for this, Charles.
At this point, why not to post also the resulting binaries so that Cygwin
people c
Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
First, I had to massage the tree in the following ways (and I was using
revision 125636):
Out of curiosity, have you done this with cygport yet?
No: it would impose too heavy a burden on my already overloaded plate.
I'm using an alternate prefix (/opt) because I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Charles Wilson wrote:
> I was testing Danny Smith's latest DWARF-2 patch, and building gcc from
> the current (rather unsettled) trunk was a bit tricky. So, I thought
> I'd post my experiences, which ultimately resulted in a f
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
It'd be nice if the archiving software would Do What I Mean and Not What I
Say. It inlined all the patches. So, here's a tarball...
The patches did come through as text attachments, though... And you can
get the whole message from the archives in m
It'd be nice if the archiving software would Do What I Mean and Not What
I Say. It inlined all the patches. So, here's a tarball...
--
Chuck
gcc-4.3.0-patches.tar.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:
I was testing Danny Smith's latest DWARF-2 patch, and building gcc from
the current (rather unsettled) trunk was a bit tricky. So, I thought
I'd post my experiences, which ultimately resulted in a fully
bootstrapped native cygwin compiler, with c,c++,objc,fortran,java frontends.
No
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 10:30:11AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
> >Dave Korn wrote:
> >
> >> Patch prepared, I'll finish writing it up and submit to the newlib list
> >> later tonight, but first I'm going to have a celebratory beer or two on
> >> t
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 10:30:11AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
>Dave Korn wrote:
>
>> Patch prepared, I'll finish writing it up and submit to the newlib list
>> later tonight, but first I'm going to have a celebratory beer or two on
>> the way home...
>
>I have applied the patch
>(http://sourcewa
Dave Korn wrote:
> Patch prepared, I'll finish writing it up and submit to the newlib list
> later tonight, but first I'm going to have a celebratory beer or two on
> the way home...
I have applied the patch
(http://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2007/msg00292.html) an GCC-4.3
(core+gfortran) builds (
Thanks very much!
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
eems include files and library's path have been set automaticly.
> Where are the settings?I typed set to list all environment variables,but I
> didn't see LIBRARY_PATH,C_INCLUDE_PATH and so on.
They're based on $prefix and compiled directly into the gcc.exe driver
program - h
RY_PATH,C_INCLUDE_PATH and so on.
After building gcc,I wanted to build g++.but I didn't know how to build it
alone.So after unziping gcc-g++-4.1.2.tar.bz2 I used the configure file in
gcc-core-4.1.2.tar.bz2.Did the generated makefile rebuild gcc-core?
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygw
On 25 March 2007 00:55, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 22 March 2007 22:08, Brian Dessent wrote:
>
>> The real problem seems to be that the libgcc is broken:
>
>> /home/User/cvsroot/gcc-obj/./prev-gcc/libgcc.a(_ctors.o): In function
>> `__sgetc_r': /usr/include/stdio.h:414: undefined reference to `_unget
wei wrote:
> Sorry,I don't know.When setting up cygwin,there is an option of path format
> and
> maybe I chose win32 style.
I don't think that would do it. There is no option in setup.exe that
I'm aware of that would cause c:/foo/bar style paths to crop up in a
build.
> I didn't change the con
Hello,Brian.Thank you for reply!
> why are there win32 paths here?
Sorry,I don't know.When setting up cygwin,there is an option of path format and
maybe I chose win32 style.
> Compiling gcc is not something a newcomer should do. If you
> just want gcc installed, select the package in setup.exe
wei wrote:
> After compiling nearly one hour,it stopped and reported the errors below:
>
> gcc -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
> -Wmissi
> ng-prototypes -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-format-attribute
> -DHAVE_CONFIG
> _H -I. -I. -I../../gcc/gcc -I../..
After compiling nearly one hour,it stopped and reported the errors below:
gcc -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissi
ng-prototypes -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-format-attribute-DHAVE_CONFIG
_H -I. -I. -I../../gcc/gcc -I../../gcc/gcc/. -I../../gcc/gcc/.
On 22 March 2007 22:08, Brian Dessent wrote:
> The real problem seems to be that the libgcc is broken:
> /home/User/cvsroot/gcc-obj/./prev-gcc/libgcc.a(_ctors.o): In function
> `__sgetc_r':
> /usr/include/stdio.h:414: undefined reference to `_ungetc'
> /usr/include/stdio.h:410: undefined referenc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
As I wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31039
Ah, okay. I failed to see that you'd posted the config.log there. (And
I mentioned gmp/mpfr as I have seen that cause the build to fail in
exactly the way you described, but it's
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 06:55:16PM -0700, Tim Prince wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>There is no conspiracy. What is needed is for there to be a vocal
>>advocate on the gcc list for Windows patches. I can only approve a very
>>limited amount of stuff so we need gcc global maintainers to approv
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is no conspiracy. What is needed is for there to be a vocal
advocate on the gcc list for Windows patches. I can only approve a very
limited amount of stuff so we need gcc global maintainers to approve the
majority of Windows fixes.
I didn't call it a conspiracy,
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
> As I wrote:
>
> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31039
Ah, okay. I failed to see that you'd posted the config.log there. (And
I mentioned gmp/mpfr as I have seen that cause the build to fail in
exactly the way you described, but it's clearly not the case
Brian Dessent wrote:
> You'll have to look at config.log but this is probably a problem with
> your system lacking all the required gmp and mpfr library packages.
> Make sure you have them all.
I have obviously GMP and MPFR installed and, as I wrote
>>...
>> The last 4.3.0 source that builds
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 08:23:46AM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote:
>Charles Wilson wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry, but the concerns expressed in the messages above are rank
>> paranoia. *Microsoft* has nothing to do with the lack of operable
>> modern gcc's on windows, and there is no conspiracy to break gcc o
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Charles Wilson wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > (2) the java runtime library is huge, and to even attempt to link it
> > as a DLL requires massive (>1GB) amounts of RAM. I seem to recall
> > that this is due to inefficiencies in the way ld creates import
> > libra
Charles Wilson wrote:
> I'm sorry, but the concerns expressed in the messages above are rank
> paranoia. *Microsoft* has nothing to do with the lack of operable
> modern gcc's on windows, and there is no conspiracy to break gcc on cygwin.
Yes, that's pure FUD.
> But having an active maintainer
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
> checking for i686-pc-cygwin-gcc... /tmp/gcc/.build/./prev-gcc/xgcc
> -B/tmp/gcc/.build/./prev-gcc/ -B/usr/local/gfortran/i686-pc-cygwin/bin/
> checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C
> compiler cannot create executables
> See `config.log' f
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
It is almost a month that the build og gcc-core 4.3.0 on Cygwin is broken:
The last 4.3.0 source that builds fine is GCC-4.3.0-20070224-trunk-122292.
The strange thing is not that a development version of GCC is broken, but
that there is NOT much will to solve it for CY
It is almost a month that the build og gcc-core 4.3.0 on Cygwin is broken:
---
../configure --prefix=/usr/local/gfortran \
--enable-languages=c,fortran \
--enable-bootstrap \
--enable-libgomp \
Hope you can help,
The 'normal' C headers are part of the C library (newlib/cygwin), the
GCC C headers are installed somewhere below /usr/lib/gcc or
/usr/share/gcc, depending on the version you're building.
Ah. Thanks alot Gerrit, that puts my mind at rest. Although it is not
exactly very neat.
T
Aaron Gray wrote:
Hi,
I believe or am pritty sure I have a problem. I am building GCC 3.4.3
but the same problem happerns with 2.95.3 and presumably with other
GCC's. I have built this before and got it to work and I am sure I had
other includes present.
Yes I know Cygwin GCC3.4.3 has not
Hi,
When I build GCC I do not seem to be getting any C headers installed only
C++ headers.
Aaron
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: htt
Hi,
I believe or am pritty sure I have a problem. I am building GCC 3.4.3 but
the same problem happerns with 2.95.3 and presumably with other GCC's. I
have built this before and got it to work and I am sure I had other includes
present.
Yes I know Cygwin GCC3.4.3 has not been released yet
There is a bug preventing from using MinGW/MSYS to build it successfully. Of
course, this bug has reported by folks at MinGW.
I am in agreement that Ada compiler is not complete if run-time tasking is not
supported. Is there any plan to support it in the future?
AV
>>> "Williams, Gerald S (Je
Anh Vo wrote:
> I successfully built it for three languages Ada, C, C++ with
> configured as --enable-languages=ada,c,c++
> --enable-threads=gnat. A number of Ada Conformance Assessment
> Test Suite (ACATS) failed. Further testing reveals that the
> Ada runtime tasking support was not included
My apology if this problem has been reported already.
I successfully built it for three languages Ada, C, C++ with configured as
--enable-languages=ada,c,c++ --enable-threads=gnat. A number of Ada Conformance
Assessment Test Suite (ACATS) failed. Further testing reveals that the Ada
runtime tas
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:28:38 -0500
"Joe Buehler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had downloaded this but not tried it yet. If you get it
> working it would be "interesting" to recompile Cygwin and
> all of its packages and see what happens. We have most of
> the core dumps out of our local Cygwin
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:28:38PM -0500, Joe Buehler wrote:
>Bill Priest wrote:
>>I've built gcc w/ the bounds checking patch on Linux and solaris and am
>>trying to build it on cygwin (w/ the cygwin modified source from
>>setup). With tweak to one file I've been able to get it to bootstrap
>>w/o
Bill Priest wrote:
I've built gcc w/ the bounds checking patch on Linux
and solaris and am trying to build it on cygwin (w/
the
cygwin modified source from setup). With tweak to
one file I've been able to get it to bootstrap w/o
any errors and the resulting C compiler will work
w/o specifying "
All,
I've built gcc w/ the bounds checking patch on Linux
and solaris and am trying to build it on cygwin (w/
the
cygwin modified source from setup). With tweak to
one file I've been able to get it to bootstrap w/o
any errors and the resulting C compiler will work
w/o specifying "-fbounds-checki
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 10:24:36AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:50:31AM +0200, Da'niel Csabai wrote:
>>I plan to have a development suite targeted to arm platform
>>(arm-elf-tools) (gcc, as, ld, objcopy, etc) for Cywin. I know it is
>>possible to build up gcc 3.2 a
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:50:31AM +0200, Da'niel Csabai wrote:
>I plan to have a development suite targeted to arm platform
>(arm-elf-tools) (gcc, as, ld, objcopy, etc) for Cywin. I know it is
>possible to build up gcc 3.2 as cross-compiler.
>I think need a specific gcc (ver. 3.2 or 3.3) & binu
On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Da'niel Csabai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I plan to have a development suite targeted to arm platform
> (arm-elf-tools) (gcc, as, ld, objcopy, etc) for Cywin. I know it is
> possible to build up gcc 3.2 as cross-compiler.
> I think need a specific gcc (ver. 3.2 or 3.3) & binutils & gdb
Wrong mailing list. I've redirected to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Corinna
- Forwarded message from Da'niel Csabai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 09:50:31 +0200
> From: "Da'niel Csabai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Building gcc
&
The goal here is to build a cross compiler from Linux to
i586-cygwin32. Binutils builds OK. GCC is having problems.
I'm attaching both the script I'm using to unpack, configure, and
build gcc as well as a log from make that fails. The crux appears to
be the inclusion of in gcc/config/i386/cy
> > I'm attempting to build gcc-2.8.1 cross compiler using the following
> > configuration..
>
>[why such an old compiler?]
This is the suggested version from Sony to program for the IO Processor of
the Playstation 2. Maybe newer versions would be ok, but this is the one
suggested.
> > ./c
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
