> On 11 November 2012 21:57, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > Here is what I did with gmp :
> >
> > $ ls $SRC/gmp*
> > /usr/local/src/gmp-5.0.5.tar.bz2
> >
> > $ /opt/schily/bin/star -x -bz -xdir -xdot -U -fs=16m
> > file=/usr/local/src/gmp-5.0.5.tar.
> > What isn't clear is where that is run. I decided that I will take your
> > approach and try to follow the magic incantations to the very
> letter. OKay,
> > sort of. I may expand on the CFLAGS just a little bit and I have to
> assume,
> > in the absence of any data, that I shall run these "c
> > The last (very annoying) issue is that when gcc bootstraps itself, the
> > freshly-built compiler doesn't generate 64-bit binaries by default.
> > BOOT_CFLAGS can work around that: http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html.
>
> That isn't true at all.
okay .. I'll just nod my head and agree.
>
> > The last (very annoying) issue is that when gcc bootstraps itself, the
> > freshly-built compiler doesn't generate 64-bit binaries by default.
> > BOOT_CFLAGS can work around that: http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html.
>
> That isn't true at all.
>
> > CC='cc -m64' CXX='CC -m64' ../gmp-5.0.
> Eric wrote:
> > > Any pointers at all as to the error of my ways ?
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#sparc64-x-solaris2
> You're up against three factors here. First, the sparc64 platform ABI
> specifies 32-bit executables unless the user specifically asks for
> 64-bit. I'm real
> > nope. Been there .. done that and that fails badly .. in fact worse
> than
> > before :
>
> Yet this is the standard way and works flawlessly if done correctly...
I can not see my error here and am wondering what the issue is.
> > However I am way way open to suggestion here.
>
> You ne
> > Any pointers at all as to the error of my ways ?
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#sparc64-x-solaris2
nope. Been there .. done that and that fails badly .. in fact worse than before
:
Configure .. look good but lies :
$ ../gcc-4.7.2/configure --build=sparc64-sun-solaris2.10
I have been trying repeatedly and in incrementally more rewarding stages
towards building a purely 64-bit GCC compiler on Solaris 10 sparc. I have no
need for the 32-bit libs at all and my entire toolchain is 64-bit only. There
are no 32-bit libs in /usr/local/lib nor do there need to be. Thus
x&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
ve seen better results.
Thank you ..
dc
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+---------+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
trap build with good test results however install fails
as seen above. Any enlightened thoughts would be welcome.
dc
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-----+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Sola
1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
>> Hr, tried that and didn't get very far probably because the
>> srcdir is at ../gcc-4.6.3
>
> I don't think that's the problem.
>
> Maybe you need
> make check RUNTESTFLAGS=compile.exp=limits-exprparen.c
> or
> make check RUNTESTFLAGS=compile.exp=*/limits-exprparen.c
> or some other variatio
> On 19 March 2012 14:56, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>> thus : http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg02155.html
>>
>> === gcc tests ===
>>
>>
>> Running target unix
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-exprparen.c -O0
again. In detail.
What would the procedure for that be ?
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org
Also : http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2010-02/msg00153.html
>
> I was surprised to see this pop up during make install :
>
c'
gmake[1]: *** [install-gcc] Error 2
gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/opt/bw/src/gcc-4.6.3-SunOS5.8-i386'
gmake: *** [install] Error 2
$
Weird. Never saw that on sparc nor anywhere else.
There is a pre-existing GCC 4.5.3 as that was the compiler used
in stage 1 of the bootstrap.
Any tho
us of virtual processor 1 as of: 03/12/12 11:47:00
on-line since 04/28/11 17:39:48.
The i386 processor operates at 400 MHz,
and has an i387 compatible floating point processor.
titan-i386-SunOS5.8 $ cat /etc/release
Solaris 8 2/02 s28x_u7wos_08a INTEL
Copyright 2002 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Assembled 18 December 2001
So I have not seen a gmp mpfr or mpc issue, anywhere.
HOWEVER, I do use the very latest revs of mpfr,gmp and mpc.
dc
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
timed out.
.
.
.
Somewhat annoying as I am in no particular hurry. :-)
dc
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
|
> On 03/02/2012 08:40 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>>>> If all goes well, I'd like to release 4.7.0 in about three weeks.
>>>>
>>>> I'll drop it on Solaris. Give it a push. Do we realy really need that
>>>> ppl/cloog stuff? I have
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>>> GCC 4.7.0 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org
>>>
>>> The first release candidate for GCC 4.7.0 is available from
>>>
>>> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.7.0-RC-20120302
>>>
>>> and
uld probably be clarified.
Would be cool to say "entirely optional".
dc
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
tp://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
ata definition has no type or storage class [enabled
by default]
foobar.c:62:9: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before string
constant
foobar.c:64:2: error: expected identifier or '(' before 'return'
foobar.c:66:1: error: expected identifier or '(' b
ae: wrong+0x000e: movl 0x0008(%ecx),%eax
(dbx) where
=>[1] wrong(0x0), at 0x80506ae
[2] main(0x1, 0x8047b4c, 0x8047b54), at 0x80506ca
(dbx) quit
$ /opt/studio/SOS11/SUNWspro/bin/cc -V
cc: Sun C 5.8 Patch 121016-08 2009/04/20
usage: cc [ options] files. Use 'cc -flags' for d
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> for (argno = 0; argno < argc; argno++) {
>> if (argno < 6)
>> *tsp++ = reg[REG_O0 + argno] = va_arg(ap, long);
>> else
>> *tsp++ = va_arg(ap, long);
*tsp++ = va_arg(ap, long);
}
va_end(ap);
reg[REG_SP] = (greg_t)sp - STACK_BIAS; /* sp (when done) */
reg[REG_O7] = (greg_t)resumecontext - 8;/* return pc */
}
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&sear
>> Any expected date on a 4.7 RC ?
>
> When it's ready. Which we'd usually expect it to be around the
> beginning of April.
cool. thank you.
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+----
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Any expected date on a 4.7 RC ?
- --
- --
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
|
e to start.
Dennis
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
block a
port to Solaris today? Are there specific bugids I can look at ?
Dennis
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dc
ex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
> Message from Dennis Clarke at 2011-11-07
> 06:38:47 --
>> > Have you checked your ulimit?
>>
>>I was thinking that too! I just recently increased the stack size limit
>> to
>>16 MB :
>
> The 'fix' in mainline set it higher:
>
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> Only the new "go" language seems to be a major issue now.
>
> The implementation of Go in the 4.6 releases does not support Solaris.
>
> Go on Solaris works on mainline.
Well, I would not have seen that coming. I should look more c
> This should probably be on the gcc-help list.
I never really know which direction to go as the issues seem to be related
to how limits-exprparen.c gets tested. However, no problem, I'll jump ship
and get out of this ml.
> On 7 November 2011 01:08, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> I'm not too sure how many things changed from 4.6.1 to 4.6.2 but I am
>> seeing a really large increase in the number of "unexpected failures" on
>> various tests.
>>
>> With 4.6.1 and Solaris I was able to get r
gmake: *** [all] Error 2
real 49.639
user1.259
sys 0.381
titan$
I can not figure out why I would be seeing a error like that.
baffled on Solaris , Dennis
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-----+
probably
impossible. I'll give it a go anyways. This can't get worse.
Dennis
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open S
em.
>
> But having config.guess produce "i386" for an OS which does not even run
> on a vanilla i386 is also wrong. A much better choice here would be the
> earliest CPU value which the OS actually supports.
$ isalist -v
pentium_pro+mmx pentium_pro pentium+mmx pentium i486 i38
won't care
> about this at all.
>
>
Personally I am all for "it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Dennis
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+---------+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
company-internal build ;-)
>
> Rainer
* nod *
Will redo ... and see what I get. Thanks for the input.
Dennis
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-----------+
| Dennis Clarke | S
problem before.
This is a case of "magic configure incantation" required ? I certainly
hope not.
Dennis
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+---+
| Dennis Clarke | Solaris and Linux and Open Source |
| dcla...@blastwave.org | Respect for open standards. |
+-+---+
ler error)
What should I think about an "internal compiler error" ?
Dennis
( concerned in Solaris world )
--
--
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x1D936C72FA35B44B
+-+-------+
| Dennis Clarke | Sol
/libcpp.a
../libdecnumber/libdecnumber.a ../libcpp/libcpp.a ./../intl/libintl.a
../libiberty/libiberty.a ../libdecnumber/libdecnumber.a
-L/opt/bw/lib/sparcv8 -lmpc -lmpfr -lgmp -ldl -liconv -L../zlib -lz
/opt/bw/src/GCC/gcc-4.6.2-RC-20111019-build/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/opt/bw/src/GCC/
Sparc v7, v8, v9 and on i386
and AMD64. I have not bothered with Intel i7 as I don't see it as any
different from an x86_64 build on AMD Opterons. At least, the result is
the same.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
> Dennis Clarke 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 thi
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> Do you know if anyone has ever tested that on Solaris ? Lately Solaris
>> is
>> where open source goes to die ( blame Larry for that ) so I figure I may
>> as well give it a shot, but before I do .. tell me know if this little
>> t
certainly
> works with -j48 that I'm using daily.
>
> Jakub
Do you know if anyone has ever tested that on Solaris ? Lately Solaris is
where open source goes to die ( blame Larry for that ) so I figure I may
as well give it a shot, but before I do .. tell me know
GCC is the ultimate open source project in my opinion in that it gives
birth to everything else. Well, that makes binutils the pen-ultimate I
guess. :-)
Thank you to the massive collection of Red Hat guys and volunteers and
to a massive colleection of truely gifted programmers and the FSF for
m
>
> We announce the availability of PPL 0.11.1, a new release of the Parma
> Polyhedra Library. This release includes several important bug fixes
> and performance improvements.
I was awaiting this. I will now try this on Solaris.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- E
bugurl=http://www.blastwave.org/support --enable-bootstrap
EOF
After three days ... I gave up waiting.
comments welcome .
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
erely an
observation from someone that tries to be very very careful with testing
and with testsuite results.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
ps: thus far GCC 4.5.2 is beaut
It is Wed now. Will we see a official release this week ?
--
Dennis
I'm doing a bootstrap with on Debian squeeze with
--enable-stage1-checking=all and --enable-checking=all and in stage 2 I
see this sort of thing about an "unsafe" issue :
../../gcc-4.5.2-RC-20101208/gcc/fold-const.c: In function
'fold_checksum_tree':
../../gcc-4.5.2-RC-20101208/gcc/fold-const.c:1
> On 13 December 2010 15:31, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> Dear GCC folks :
>>
>> I have been closely watching the testsuite results as they come in and I
>> have yet to see anyone do anything with the 4.5.2 RC for Solaris. Other
>> than me of course. I have seen som
01062.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-12/msg01063.html
If there is some other snapshot or RC that I should be testing please let
me know. Thank you dear GCC folks.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> WARNING: program timed out.
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr46534.c -O0 (test for excess errors)
>
> This is likely a bug in your assembler.
Well, the assembler is this :
# file /usr/local/bin/as
/usr/local/bin/as: ELF 32-bit LSB ex
-torture/compile/pr46534.c -Os (test for excess errors)
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr46534.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors)
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr46534.c -O2 -fwhopr (test for excess errors)
.
.
.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla
>
>
> Dennis Clarke-2 wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>>
>>> This was built against ppl 0.10.2 and cloog 0.15.10.
>>
>> Have you tried a bootstrap with neither ppl nor cloog ? I
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 01:44:38PM -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> > >>
>> > > This was built against ppl 0.10.2 and cloog 0.
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 01:44:38PM -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> >>
>> > This was built against ppl 0.10.2 and cloog 0.15.10.
>>
>> Have you tried a bootstrap with nei
an bootstrap builds.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
t accounts, please feel free to
ask.
--
Dennis Clarke 2010 OpenSolaris Governance Board Member
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
I have seen thus far ( I know time will tell ) it seems to
be one of the very best releases in years.
Works well in the Solaris world also and even on i386-pc-solaris2.8 and
that is saying something. :-)
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
>> Roberto Bagnara Patricia M. Hill Enea Zaffanella
>>
>> Applied Formal Methods Laboratory
>> Department of Mathematics
>> University of Parma, Italy
>>
>
> cool.. just downloaded it.. just curious if I need to install ppl and
> cloog on the system then build gcc? right now with the latest snapsh
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> FYI , bug 44455 is a show stopper in the Solaris world.
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44455
>
> This is
>
> bootstrap/44455 GCC fails to build if MPFR 3.0.0 (Release Candidate) is
> used
>
> Why
>> === gcc Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes57009
>> # of unexpected failures67
>> # of unexpected successes 7
>> # of expected failures 197
>> # of unsupported tests 518
>>
>> === g++ Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected
>> Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
>> not build these libraries in-tree.
>
> Yes, and verify that GMP and MPFR are correctly compiled with
> "make check". Recent versions are miscompiled on SPARC/Solaris
> by GCC 4.3.x for x < 3 or 4.
>
> The recommended versio
> Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>>> GMP: include 4.3.2, lib 4.3.2
>>> MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
>>> MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
>
> fails,
>
> Richard recommends:
>
>> Use G
> On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Dennis Clarke
> wrote:
>>>>>> GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
>>>>>> MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
>>>>>> MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
>>>>>
>>>>> Use GMP from the 4.
GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
>>>
>>> Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
>>> not build these libraries in-tree.
>>
>> I built and tested them separate.
>
> You forgot to set LD_LIBRA
>> If I go back and rebuild gmp mpfr and mpc thus :
>>
>>
>> GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
>> MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
>> MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
>
> Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
> not build these libraries in-tree.
I built and tested them
> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> FYI , bug 44455 is a show stopper in the Solaris world.
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44455
>
> This is
>
> bootstrap/44455 GCC fails to build if MPFR 3.0.0 (Release Candidate) is
used
>
> Why would this
g 44455 is a show stopper in the Solaris world.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44455
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
> On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 01:41:10PM -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>> > The GNU Compiler Collection version 4.4.4 has been released.
>>
>> Please provide MD5/SHA1/SHA256 hash sums for the release files in your
>> release announcement. Those would be the
who knows where.
Just a suggestion.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
May I make a subject line change please ?
This issue is trivial trailing whitespace changes I think and procedures,
process and notice of such changes.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open
most precious resource we have, good people that work together
openly and with respect and dignity.
Having said that, I firmly would defend any of you as truely awesome
engineers and good people that work to benefit the state of mankind.
--
Dennis Clarke http://www.blastwave.org/
dcla...
>> you can buy a support contract for it then you have a valid platform in
>> commercial use.
>
> You can get support for the OpenSolaris distribution if you like
I just went and looked ... you are correct, they have three levels in
fact. It looks like $1080 for premium, $720 is standard business
nity end user world see
SunOS5.11 as being a de facto release? I would say yes.
Solaris 10 is the enterprise class commercial grade Solaris release and it
is staying put for a long long long time yet.
--
Dennis Clarke
dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
> Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > How did you do with the new PPL bits ? That went smoothly ?
>>
> They're not mandatory for 4.4.x so I've simply ignored them for now.
ah .. how very tricky of you :-)
Dennis
> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> Re: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.3/buildstat.html
>>
>> I was looking for testsuite results to compare with on Solaris and I saw
>> that nearly every report for GCC 4.3.3 was done by Tom G. Christensen.
>>
>> All GCC 4.3.3 reports
this week.
--
Dennis Clarke
http://www.blastwave.org/
> Attached is a shortened test report with the following lines removed:
>
excellent, now we have a benchmark/comparison to look at. Well done,
excellent work.
What did you use to build libgmp and mpfr ? I am curious because most
people that try wwith Sun Studio Express or Sun Studio 12 fail pret
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Dennis Clarke
> wrote:
> ...
>>>> well done, do you have a full testsuite report ?
>
> Well, Dennis, I have problems running the testsuite. I think I'm
> missing some of the prereqs, so it will be a while. I'll report b
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Dennis Clarke
> wrote:
>>
>>> A successful build on Open Solaris 2008.11:
>>>
>>> $../gcc-4.4.0/config.guess
>>> i386-pc-solaris2.11
>>>
>>> $ gcc-4.4.0t -v
>>> Using built-in specs.
> A successful build on Open Solaris 2008.11:
>
> $../gcc-4.4.0/config.guess
> i386-pc-solaris2.11
>
> $ gcc-4.4.0t -v
> Using built-in specs.
> Target: i386-pc-solaris2.11
> Configured with: ../gcc-4.4.0/configure
> --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --disable-multilib
> --program-suffix=-4.4.0t --
Solaris is on your Primary Platform List?
Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org
Director Blastwave.org 905 - 373 - 9441
Open Source Services for Solaris http://www.blastwave.org
-
Further Info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blastwave
>> In any case . .the gcc binary is missing in action .. did make install
>> fail in some weird way ?
>
> Possibly, but make should have failed also.
>
I re-ran the whole bootstrap process and this time was rewarded with
everything I wanted. I don't know what the issue was earlier. Oh well.
Denn
n a user installs a pre-compiled ready to run GCC package do they get
the headers "fixed" on the fly or do they get delivered ...
--
Dennis Clarke
efined(SVR4))
---
> #if !defined(X_NOT_STDC_ENV) && (!defined(__sun__) || defined(SVR4))
96c105
< #if defined(SYSV) || defined(luna) || defined(sun) || defined(__sxg__)
---
> #if defined(SYSV) || defined(luna) || defined(__sun__) || defined(__sxg__)
$
It looks like anywhere you find the string "defined(sun)" you change it to
"defined(__sun__)".
That is an observation.
But what did this ?
Was it fixincludes or was it the mkheaders script ?
and why ?
--
Dennis Clarke
This is a strange result, I seem to have everything I wanted, fortran and
ada etc but no actual gcc file.
If I look at the final output in the $DEST/bin ddir I see this, sorted by
inodes numbers with blank lines added for clarity :
# ls -lapin bin | sort -n | sed 's/^[ \t]*//'
otal 92092
117274
>> > I'll try sparc64, powerpc64 and ia64 when the machines are available.
>>
>> I can probably help you with the Sparc64 requirement. To be precise, do
>> you need Sun UltraSparc or are you looking for the multicore SPARC64
>> processor which is a ( slightly ) different beast?
>
> Thanks for your
th the Sparc64 requirement. To be precise, do
you need Sun UltraSparc or are you looking for the multicore SPARC64
processor which is a ( slightly ) different beast?
Dennis Clarke
http://www.blastwave.org/
> Andreas Schwab writes:
>
>> Dennis Clarke writes:
>>
>> > One of the things I have had no joy with is figuring out how to
>> > include the ada component but that is a battle for another day.
>>
>> To build ada you need a good ada compiler to st
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 05:24:36PM -0800, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> This is old 32-bit Sparc so I don't think 64-bit code will serve any
>> purpose here.
>
> Specifying --disable-multilib at configure time should keep it from
> building the 64-bit libraries.
I'
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 04:53:09PM -0800, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>> This is on an old Sun Sparc machine running Solaris 8.
>>
>> I had CFLAGS set thus :
>>
>> $ echo $CFLAGS
>> -mcpu=v7 -m32 -mno-app-regs -pthreads
>
> That's your pro
w why the option -m64 is in there. I certainly didn't ask for it.
Any thoughts on this ?
--
Dennis Clarke
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
