On 5/28/07, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew --
Would you please give me a summary of the status? Are there regressions
on major platforms?
The summary is that powerpc-darwin, powerpc64-linux-gnu, spu-elf,
i686-linux-gnu bootstraps and tests with two regression (explained
below)
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 03:48:39PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Therefore, I plan to make the GCC 4.2.1 release on or about July 13th.
> As with the 4.2.0 release, I will be most concerned about P1 regressions
> in 4.2.x, not present in 4.1.x. At present, that looks to be:
>
> * PR 30252 misco
Now that GCC 4.2.0 is finally out the door, I'm looking at 4.3.0. Stage
1 has been going on a *long* time, and there have been a lot of changes
made. (The Wiki page has an impressive list.) We also seem to have the
dataflow stuff ready for merge to mainline, and it looks like
POINTER_PLUS may al
I would like to try to keep the GCC 4.2.x release branch on the
time-driven release cycle for point releases that is part of the GCC
development plan. I left an embarrassing gap in the GCC 4.1.x release
cycle, and I plan to avoid that mistake for GCC 4.2.x.
Therefore, I plan to make the GCC 4.2.1
At this point, I do not plan to do any further GCC 4.1.x releases. The
GCC 4.1.x series was a great success, and is very widely used. I think
it's a fine idea for people to continue to apply fixes to the 4.1.x
branch, under the usual release-branch rules, so that people interested
in longer-term
Snapshot gcc-4.1-20070528 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.1-20070528/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.1 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Joseph, Richard --
As C maintainers, have either of you looked at Chao-Ying's fixed-point
branch?
My understanding (from the note on the Wiki page) is that the
fixed-point support is now in reasonably good shape, and works on all
architectures, using an emulation library. So, I'm wondering if we
Andrew --
I'm trying to firm up GCC 4.3 planning a bit. One of the things I'm
considering is whether or not the POINTER_PLUS branch should be merged
as part of 4.3. My understanding from looking at your emails is that
the branch is in pretty good shape.
Would you please give me a summary of the
Thanks to those who advised on hardware.
FSF France has ordered 3x Dell SC1345, bi-Opteron 2212 (dual core
2GHz) with 4GB of RAM and plenty of disk, these should be in place
sometimes in june and at least three of the old Pentium 3 Dell will be
removed from the farm. OS will likely be debian this
On 5/28/07, Rafael Espindola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/27/07, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, some more details for those who want them:
>
> The repo contains the complete history of gcc trunk (125000 svn revisions).
>
> It takes roughly 350 meg of disk space (450 on mac due
I have built and installed gmp, mpfr and GNU make on gcc04 using
--prefix=/home/rask/opt, so you can build GCC if you pass
--with-gmp=/home/rask/opt --with-mpfr=/home/rask/opt to configure. You will
need let the dynamic linker know this:
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/home/rask/opt/lib
GNU make is
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 07:04:01PM +0200, Thomas Neumann wrote:
> I see your point. I originally thought I would be sending one patch for
> whole gcc (as I have the complete patch ready), just broken into smaller
> parts for reviewing.
If possible,
1) Break patches up into parts which can be a
On 5/28/07, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just in case you've forgotten: You posted a patch for h8300 here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg02031.html>
Yes, but it's got bugs, and it will be more efficient for an actual
h8300 expert to fix them than for me
On 5/27/07, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Oh, some more details for those who want them:
The repo contains the complete history of gcc trunk (125000 svn revisions).
It takes roughly 350 meg of disk space (450 on mac due to inode size).
Curiosity, any plans to convert the full gcc r
> looking for something to review. And when posting a patch, try to make it
> easy for reviewers to tell that your patch is for their part of GCC.
I see your point. I originally thought I would be sending one patch for
whole gcc (as I have the complete patch ready), just broken into smaller
parts f
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 12:41:32PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> I see that many of
> the more popular CPUs have already been done:
>
>alpha arm avr i386 ia64 m68k mips rs6000 s390 spu xtensa
>
> but there are still a lot left to go:
>
>arc bfin c4x cris crx fr30 frv h8300 iq2000 m32c m
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 09:26:35PM +0200, Thomas Neumann wrote:
>
> Therefore I am offering a deal to potential reviewers: If you promise to
> review some of my patches, I will code something _you_ care about.
> Within reasonable limits, of course :)
A more traditional approach would be to use
Hi all,
I have defined a target hook TARGET_EXPAND_BUILTIN_SAVEREGS (GCC
4.1.1) as an alternative to TARGET_SETUP_INCOMING_VARARGS so as to
code ___builtin_saveregs as per my target. But this target hook is not
getting recognized.
Is there anything else this target hook depends on?
Regards,
Roh
On Thu, 17 May 2007, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Should section "GCC 4.2.0 manuals" of
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/
>>
>> not also list the "GNU OpenMP Manual" that is available for 4.2?
> Yes, it probably should. The released docs have been prepared correctly:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedo
"H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 27/05/2007 21:00:38:
> On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 06:52:30PM +0100, Rafael Espindola wrote:
> > On 5/27/07, Razya Ladelsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >Getting failure during bootstrap for libjava on powerpc linux:
> > >
> > >configure: error:
On 5/28/07, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 02:06:21PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> I have to look into bugzilla 3.0 migration first though. Bugzilla 3.0
> introduces a custom fields mechanism, and i'd rather at least store
> our data using that, tha
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 02:06:21PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> I have to look into bugzilla 3.0 migration first though. Bugzilla 3.0
> introduces a custom fields mechanism, and i'd rather at least store
> our data using that, than editing the schema wholesale like we do now
> (which is *much*
3. ./configure
Read the instructions. Building in the source directory is not supported.
Often buggy and thus not suggested, but in principle supported.
Paolo
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 10:02:02AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > >1. Add a field to bugzilla for the SVN revision at which a particular
> > >regression was introduced. Display that in bugzilla as a link to the
> > >online SVN history browser so that clicking on a link takes us
Hi,
I'm working on a new gcc port for which I'm writing a loop reorganization as a
part of the machine dependant pass. This reorg requires information regarding
the number of iterations in each loop. I tried to rebuild current_loops and
extract the info from there using different loop initializ
On 5/28/07, Deepen Mantri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I am building the C/C++ GCC toolchain for i386 target on x86/Linux
platform. The native gcc version is "gcc (GCC) 3.2 20020903
(Red Hat Linux 8.0 3.2-7)" and the version of the sources are:
GCC : gcc-4.3-20070302
Binutils : binutils-
Hi,
I am building the C/C++ GCC toolchain for i386 target on x86/Linux
platform. The native gcc version is "gcc (GCC) 3.2 20020903
(Red Hat Linux 8.0 3.2-7)" and the version of the sources are:
GCC : gcc-4.3-20070302
Binutils : binutils-070204
Newlib : newlib-1.15.0
To enable libmud
On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 12:41 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> but there are still a lot left to go:
>
> arc bfin c4x cris crx fr30 frv h8300 iq2000 m32c m32r m68hc11 mcore mmix
> mn10300 mt pa pdp11 score sh sparc stormy16 v850 vax
I can provide the patch for arc sometime soon
regards
saurab
28 matches
Mail list logo
