Hi,
We're pleased to announce that gcc110.fsffrance.org a new powerful
POWER7 server made available by IBM (1) and hosted by OSUOSL (2) is now
online in the GCC Compile Farm (3), a not-for-profit project maintained by
the Free Software Fundation France (4).
The server is an IBM Power 730 Express
On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 13:58 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Eric Botcazou writes:
>
> >> If there is an up to date patch, I'm happy to review it if it would
> >> help. But perhaps an Ada maintainer would prefer to do the review, I
> >> don't know what the usual policy is as I've never approved
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 20:03 +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 07/10/2011 06:45 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> > Toon Moene writes:
>
> >> As of a couple of months, I perform a bootstrap-with-C++
> >> (--enable-build-with-cxx) daily on my machine between 18:10 and 20:10
> >> UTC.
> >>
> >> I see tha
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 09:44 -0400, Richard Kenner wrote:
> > A reversion policy that's too trigger-happy can leave you unable to
> > make forward progress on an important patch. At the very least you'd
> > need to write in stone that a patch can be reinstalled if the
> > reporter of the problem is
Hi,
We're pleased to announce that Intel (1) has donated three servers
and that IRILL (2) has donated hosting for them. All machines
are now online in the GCC Compile Farm (3).
- gcc20: a dual Xeon X5670 2.93 GHz 12 cores 24 threads 24 GB RAM system
- gcc46/47: two Atom D510 systems
Roberto Di
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 08:59 +, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 10/31/2010 07:09 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> > This patch should not of course change whether or not distros choose to
> > package the Java compiler; undoubtedly they would continue to do so,
> > just as they package the Ada compiler
Hi,
I'm pleased to announce that AMD (1) donated two 12-cores Magny-Cours
processors running at 1.5 GHz to the GCC Compile Farm project (2) and
that FSF France (3) funded the purchase of the rest of the machine,
including 64GB of RAM, 2TB of disk and 80 GB of SSD.
The machine, named gcc10, has b
On Sat, 2010-04-24 at 19:00 +0400, Дмитрий Дьяченко wrote:
> Thank You, Manual and Joel
>
> I'll try to choose smth appropriate to start.
>
> I am a little confused by the term:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm#How_to_Get_Involved.3F
> "3. AND at least one free software project you are a con
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:03 -0400, Robert Dewar wrote:
> I do realize that some people are running gcc on very old
> machines, that particularly happens say in developing
> countries or with students or hobbyists using old cast
> off machines.
For those developping free software the compile farm
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 13:57 +0200, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> (BTW I call lowlevel any language which does not manage memory
> automatically; I am quite fond of Ocaml even if I don't use it much today.
> So in my eyes C++, Ada95 & Fortran2005 are still low-level; this is only a
> matter of taste
also be interesting, but somewhat harder owing to the more
> free-form nature of the text there. Still, a two-to-one ratio of linux to
> rest-of-the-world would be in line with my subjective impression: it's not
> overwhelming the rest, but it's substantially the best tende
On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 09:17 -0700, Gary Funck wrote:
> On 04/07/10 11:11:05, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > I would suggest splitting patches across reviewer domains. See
> > previous merges from big branches for examples. This makes it easier
> > for maintainers and reviewers to review the relevant pa
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 12:02 -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> > >> http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/amazing-feats-of-clang-error-recovery.html
> > >
> > > ...As it happens, some C++ diagnostics are better than the
> > > same diagnostic for C and viceversa.
>
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:45:11AM -0700, Chris L
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 00:33 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
> > $ ../trunk/configure --prefix=/n/100/guerby/install-trunk
> > --enable-languages=c --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-nls
> > --enable-threads=posix --with-mpfr=
On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 16:34 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to build a fully 32 bits GCC on a x86_64-linux 64 bits debian
> > system which has all the 32 bits libraries installed (this is for
Hi,
I'm trying to build a fully 32 bits GCC on a x86_64-linux 64 bits debian
system which has all the 32 bits libraries installed (this is for the
GCC compile farm testers).
I've played with various things including --with-ld= and putting a fake
"ld" script in PATH but something is hardcoding "/u
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 16:10 +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> As the last of the shared GCC runtime libraries, libgnat.so and
> libgnarl.so lack symbol versioning support and a defined ABI.
> Currently, they use libgnat-4.5.so and libgnarl-4.5.so SONAMEs, what
> libtool calls release versioning. If the
On Sun, 2010-02-21 at 20:44 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 21/02/2010 20:03, Martin Guy wrote:
>
> > The point about defaults is that the GCC default tends to filter down
> > into the default for distributions;
>
> I'd find it surprising if that was really the way it happens; don't
> distributio
On Sun, 2010-01-10 at 15:46 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > The aliasing rules treat "char" specially because char is a bit like a
> > "poor main's void".
>
> Not symmetrically though, only for the type of the lvalue expression used to
> access the object (C99 6.5.7).
BTW in Ada if one uses addr
Hi,
FYI this problem is still here on powerpc64-linux, I opened
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42519
There's also:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32193
Laurent
On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 15:06 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Trunk bootstrap on p
On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 10:42 +, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 21:00 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 21:02 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > > The 43 slides presentation in english is available here
> > >
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 21:02 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > The 43 slides presentation in english is available here
> > in PDF and openoffice format:
> >
> > http://guerby.org/ftp/gcc-toulibre-20091216.pdf
> > http://guerby.org/ftp/gcc-toulibre-20091216.odp
>
> A small nit: you don't need to do 'm
Hi,
FYI I just did a ~2 hours presentation of the GCC project to
my local LUG in Toulouse, France:
http://toulibre.org
The 43 slides presentation in english is available here
in PDF and openoffice format:
http://guerby.org/ftp/gcc-toulibre-20091216.pdf
http://guerby.org/ftp/gcc-toulibre-2009121
On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 12:57 +0100, Christian Joensson wrote:
> 2009/10/26 Christian Joensson :
> > I noticed on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-10/msg02488.html
> > (trunk revision 153541) that the acats test suite was not run... and
> > looking into acats.log I see this:
> >
> > compila
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 17:48 +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd say from the symptoms tasking doesn't work at all, could you try
> with a simpler testcase:
>
> -- begin tt.adb
> with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO;
> procedure TT is
>t
Hi,
I'd say from the symptoms tasking doesn't work at all, could you try
with a simpler testcase:
-- begin tt.adb
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO;
procedure TT is
task T;
task body T is
begin
Put_Line ("task");
end;
begin
Put_Line ("main");
end;
-- end tt.adb
To my knowled
On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 16:58 +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > I need to get run baseline test results on 4.3 and 4.4 for C and
> > C++. But the GNAT/RTEMS Ada results show a large number of
> > failures on the head that were not present in 4.3 and 4.4.
> >
> > SPARC and MIPS went from 2 to 319
> > x
On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 07:21 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> EH_MECHANISM=-gcc
I don't think this is correct for windows targets:
EH_MECHANISM must be left to its original empty
definition to get sjlj exceptions which are the only
one working on windows IIRC.
Sincerely,
Laurent
On Sat, 2009-08-22 at 23:33 +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 12:00 +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:08:00 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > >On 12.08.2009 23:07, Martin Guy wrote:
> > >> On 8/12/09, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 12:00 +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> - The patch includes a change to eliminate pointless use of exceptions
> in xsinfo.adb. That was needed for 4.3 and does no harm in 4.4, but I
> have not checked if 4.4 actually needs it.
This patch is still needed when you use your
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 12:00 +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:08:00 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >On 12.08.2009 23:07, Martin Guy wrote:
> >> On 8/12/09, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >>> So any ACATS results from any other ARM target would be
> >>> appreciated.
> >>
> >> I
On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 07:53 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > * Laurent GUERBY wrote on Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:52:35PM CEST:
> > > > => gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/run_all.sh
> > >
> > > > 3/ Here is the point I find surprising: the "ps fauxww&quo
On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 01:37 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> Hmpf. That seems to rule out that theory. Gnatlink is still spawning the
> gcc driver to link, rather than the linker itself; maybe the driver's doing
> something wrong? Is collect-ld a shell script or an executable on your host?
It's a sc
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 23:36 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY writes:
>
> > Any idea of why /bin/sh is running stuff in parallel instead
> > of sequential?
>
> Have you tried set -x?
IIRC I tried at first but it didn't gave me useful information,
every
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 23:25 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello,
>
> * Laurent GUERBY wrote on Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:52:35PM CEST:
> > => gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/run_all.sh
>
> > 3/ Here is the point I find surprising: the "ps fauxww" run in the
> &g
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 22:19 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
> > 3/ Here is the point I find surprising: the "ps fauxww" run in the
> > second "if" show that even if the script is fully sequential
> > at least one gnatmake subpro
Hi,
Even after the last patch I can still see random ACATS failures on a
stock debian etch x86_64 machine (gcc13). I've added many traces to the
ACATS script and I can see now a common pattern and it's not related
to Ada multi threading or wrong code generation.
First the ACATS script itself is r
Hi,
The compile farm builders show two broken bootstraps:
* sparc-linux (gcc54)
C bootstrap is broken
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40788
I just added a 1 day revision range to this PR, sparc-solaris is broken
too.
../../trunk/gcc/genattrtab.c: In function 'attr_rtx_1':
../../trunk
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 10:28 -0400, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
> > In most Ada code array T index type will likely be "Natural range <>"
> > and so the type system will not give useful bounds for optimizations.
>
> Well very often t
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 15:32 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 07/27/2009 12:25 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
> > Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> >
> >>>> if Dynamic_N >= T'First and Dynamic_N > T'Last then
> >>> Huh? I can't understand the first co
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 09:34 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 06:25:12PM +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> >for I in T'First .. Dynamic_N loop
> > T (I) := 0.0; -- generate check I in T'First .. T'Last
> >end loop;
> >
Isn't it the same as
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40578
Were I suggested GNAT_FOPEN (and you commented too)?
Sincerely,
Laurent
On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 16:30 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40857
>
>
> There's a clash between the FOPEN mac
On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 12:03 -0400, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Indeed an alternative approach to handling this problem in GCC would
> be to adapt the Ada model for C and C++ which would not be too hard
> to do I suspect. Then gcc could be improved to handle this model
> better and more effectively with r
On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 13:47 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Apparently no one has hit this case. RTEMS does
> not have two error codes that g-socket.adb
> maps back. From s-oscons.ads:
>
>ESHUTDOWN : constant := -1; -- Cannot send once
> shutdown
>ESOCKTNOSUPPO
On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 07:43 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 07/03/2009 07:31 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> >> This was pretty bad, but it was also unlucky that the failure was only
> >> on the exact arch that the tester builds for. Failures on powerpc are
> >> extremely annoying, failures on SPARC w
On Sat, 2009-06-27 at 13:51 +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-06-27 at 13:25 +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > This was the only va_arg usage, may be we should apply it on trunk too
> > > as the patched version is supposed to work for both C and C++.
> >
>
On Sat, 2009-06-27 at 13:25 +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > This was the only va_arg usage, may be we should apply it on trunk too
> > as the patched version is supposed to work for both C and C++.
>
> Yes, but I'm testing a patch for trunk with more changes.
For reference here is my current draf
On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 12:52 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Arnaud Charlet writes:
>
> >> Switching gnatbind to generate Ada if there's nothing against
> >> it might be a better solution since stage1 uses the system gnatbind, so
> >> a patch to current gnatbind will not help (unless we push it t
On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 14:07 -0400, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> > gnatbind -C appears to be used when bootstrapping gcc to generate .c
> > files. With --enable-build-with-cxx, those .c files will be compiled
> > with a C++ compiler. The symbols emitted by that compilation ne
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 15:28 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Richard Guenther writes:
>
> >> I guess this has to do with reserved word conflict on "new":
> >>
> >> <<
> >> tree
> >> substitute_in_type (tree t, tree f, tree r)
> >> {
> >> tree new;
>
> >>
> >> Do you have some way to deal wi
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 13:32 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I am pleased to report that if you configure gcc with
> --enable-build-with-cxx, which causes the core compiler to be built
> using a C++ compiler, a bootstrap on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu now
> completes.
>
> I would like to encourage pe
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 21:49 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY writes:
>
> > So 0.15.3 configure does not set $with_ppl variable at all.
>
> Sure it does. Look at the argument parsing loop.
I added a dump and $with_ppl is indeed set correctly but $ppl_prefix
(wh
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 21:31 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY writes:
>
> > Looking more at cloog-ppl/configure I find stuff like:
> >
> > <<
> > # Check whether --with-ppl or --without-ppl was given.
> > if test "${with_ppl+set}&qu
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 18:46 +0200, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> Any suggestion about how to improve the PPL is welcome. This, of course,
> applies also to the build machinery.
Hi Roberto,
I added some instructions on how to build to the GCC wiki (end of page):
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Graphite_Build
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:07 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Another Graphite build issue: it appears that I must not use
> --disable-shared when I configure PPL. If I do use --disable-shared, I
> get this:
>
> /home/iant/gnu/ppl-0.10.2-install/lib/libppl_c.a(ppl_c_implementation_common.o):
> In
Hi,
What about enabling Ada build in 4.5 when configure finds out a suitable
Ada compiler?
Laurent
On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 22:28 +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> This breaks Ada on x86:
It's a procedural mistake on my side: I commited the wrong
iteration of the libada/Makefile.in patch, it is missing the pair of "rm
-rf". I checked and the version on 4.4 doesn't have the issue.
I've commited the right version of libada/Makefile.in
as revision 145673, it should fix incremental bui
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 12:37 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> > I created the cond-optab svn branch and finished committing the
> > cond-optab patches to it. I also documented it in svn.html.
>
> > To aid testing, I'd like people to help boots
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 23:10 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> Hi Laurent,
>
> On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 13:24 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >> On the above list, what are the target triples that are available? Do
> >> th
rent trunk fails to bootstrap but this is with C only so the issue
is not Ada related.
Sincerely,
Laurent
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 19:46 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 18:24 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 20:40 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
On Sun, 2009-04-05 at 08:25 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:25 AM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > I'm thinking of changing my auto tester to report a broken bootstrap
> > (the first time a bootstrap fails), is there a normalized way to
> > report such failu
Hi,
On sparc-linux gcc54 I get at rev 145425:
/home/guerby/build/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/guerby/build/./prev-gcc/
-B/n/54/guerby/install-trunk/sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC
-W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-p\
rototypes -Wcast-qual -Wold-style-definit
Hi,
The compile farm powerpc-linux tester (gcc53) now fails to bootstrap,
from the ChangeLog and the message I would guess this was caused by PR
8781/37892 patch.
Sincerely,
Laurent
Updated to revision 145531.
=> OK
Updating SVN tree
Ugcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c
Ugcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.h
Ugcc
Hi
The license wording will soon be changed and Ada gcc/ada/scn.adb
(function Determine_License) currently checks about licence.
Any change to the wording breaks Ada bootstrap as Jakub found out.
How should we proceed? What will happen with existing
installed compilers?
Thanks in advance,
Laure
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 15:21 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
> > libbackend.a(builtins.o): In function `fold_builtin_1':
> > ../../trunk/gcc/builtins.c:10319: undefined reference to `mpfr_j0'
> > ../../trunk/gcc/builti
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 14:37 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
> > /home/guerby/build-ppl/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/guerby/build-ppl/./prev-gcc/
> > -B/n/17/guerby/install-trunk-ppl/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -g -O2
> > -DI
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 00:48 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
> > > If you're able to compile and install GCC on a system then my experience
> > > is that configuring and installing GMP and MPFR from .tar.gz is hassle
> > > free (you must use --disable-sh
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 20:58 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
> > Steven Bosscher wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Kaveh R. Ghazi
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If there are no objections, I'll create a patch.
> >>
> >> P... for those
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 10:22 +1100, Ben Elliston wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 18:09 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>
> > Interestingly, the results show that no compiler has more test results
> > posted than GCC 4.4.0, which hasn't even been released yet! It looks
> > like there are many results f
On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 19:09 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > The compile farm machine gcc41 is a Merced based machine:
> ...
> > model name : Merced
> ...
> > Now I don't know if gcc41 falls in your -mt
On Sun, 2009-03-15 at 17:16 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> I can't find any test results in
> gcc-testresults reported with -mtune=itanium1 [1]. Those people who
> still use Itanium1 are probably better off if they stick with the
> older GCC releases (pre-gcc-3.4) because at least back then, Itan
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 22:45 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Trunk on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi (compile farm gcc50) currently fails
> > about 1000 C tests:
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/m
On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 01:05 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > Can you provide example code? I'm confused enough to believe
> > that you *should* get this effect with PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS
> > (modulo current bugs).
>
> Imagine a device with four 8-bit registers followed by a 32-bit
> register with
Hi,
Trunk on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi (compile farm gcc50) currently fails
about 1000 C tests:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-03/msg00810.html
99% of those fail are neon FAIL:
...
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/neon/vst4_laneu32.c scan-assembler vst4.32[ \\t]+\\
\\{(([dD][0-9]+[[0-9]+]-
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 18:44 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I'm happy to report that the gcc-in-cxx branch can now bootstrap. That
> is, the code in gcc proper can now be compiled with a C++ compiler.
Hi, did you test with Ada enabled? There are some C files in the
Ada compiler and RTS.
Laurent
On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 18:24 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 20:40 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 19:36 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> > > Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:59 +0000, Dave Korn wrote:
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 20:40 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 19:36 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> > Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:59 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> > >> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:04 +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> When I did some performance measurements a few years back -- probably
> on a VR413x -- n32 did give a noticeable improvement over o32.
For the fun of it I did some tests on gzip and bzip2 (sources
patched debian lenny - except for bzip2
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 14:47 +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > > You are missing s390(x) here which is even a secondary architecture.
> >
> > Yes but this kind of machine is not easily available at least for
> > now :).
>
> BTW, for at least some of the target architectures, you might be able to
>
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 13:24 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > I believe currently all architectures with machines able to host a GCC
> > bootstrap are now represented,
>
> You are missing s390(x) here which is even a secondary architecture.
Yes but this kind of machine is not easily available at
Hi,
Thanks to many donors of both hosting and machines the architecture
coverage of the GCC Compile Farm has been greatly expanded
in the recent monthes:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm
<<
Architectures currently available:
* i686
* x86_64, including three bi-quad core with 16
On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 10:51 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 21:04 +0100, Rolf Ebert wrote:
> >>> Right, that's why the change should be reverted on the 4.3 branch. On
> >>> the
> >>> other hand, if y
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 21:04 +0100, Rolf Ebert wrote:
> > Right, that's why the change should be reverted on the 4.3 branch. On the
> > other hand, if you can get the ZCX support to work on the mainline before
> > 4.4.0 is released, we could try there.
>
> FYI, I have just succeeded in building
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 17:02 -0800, David Daney wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:04 +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >> Laurent GUERBY writes:
> >>> I was wondering why mips64*-*-linux does not have the same
> >>> handlin
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:04 +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY writes:
> > I was wondering why mips64*-*-linux does not have the same
> > handling of multiarch as powerpc/sparc/x86 in gcc/config.gcc:
> > 32 bits compiler binaries with 32/64 target choice via &qu
Hi,
I was wondering why mips64*-*-linux does not have the same
handling of multiarch as powerpc/sparc/x86 in gcc/config.gcc:
32 bits compiler binaries with 32/64 target choice via "-m", --with-cpu
and --enable-targets support for configure. Is there any specific reason
for this?
If reason is "jus
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 10:23 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 08:56 +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > > > OK for stage 1 (GCC 4.5), currently pretty much everything is frozen on
> > > > mainline, except regressions (I hope stage 1 will open s
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 23:32 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> >> At http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html , I see:
> > I believe this one is for released compilers, not SVN trunk.
>
> Actually, http://gcc.gnu.org/install/ is
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 20:38 +0100, Oliver Kellogg wrote:
> Ah, then I was not looking in the right place.
> At http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html , I see:
I believe this one is for released compilers, not SVN trunk.
> > Building the Ada compiler
> >
> > In order to build GNAT, the Ada compile
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 19:36 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:59 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> >> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm not sure 3.4 will work for trunk
> >> I was just entirely unable to
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:59 +, Dave Korn wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure 3.4 will work for trunk
>
> I was just entirely unable to get 3.4.4 to bootstrap a 4.3.2 compiler. I
> used 4.3.0 and it worked. I forget what I used to build the 4.3.0
On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 05:10 +0100, Oliver Kellogg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On attempting a bootstrap of trunk r144402 with --enable-languages=c,ada,c++
> using gcc version 3.3.5 20050117 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux)
> on i586 I get:
Must be quite ancient :)
> I couldn't find these Ada installation instruct
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 17:39 +0100, Vincent R. wrote:
> And what if I want to debug a cross compiler, there is no cc1 or cc1plus
> with the toolchain I use:
Try
arm-mingw32ce-gcc -v -c myfile.c
it will tell you where is cc1 and the real commands launched
by the driver. The xxx-gcc binary is not
Hi,
Trunk bootstrap on powerpc64-linux (debian etch) fails on a warning
during libgomp build:
<<
if /bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile
/home/guerby/build-144268/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/guerby/build-144268/./gcc/
-B/n/41/guerby/install-trunk-144268/powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/n/41/gue
With the two patches I submitted 4.4 produces
100% clean ACATS and gnat.dg results on mipsel-linux:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-02/msg01730.html
Which is way better than 4.3 :).
Laurent
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 08:56 +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > > OK for stage 1 (GCC 4.5), curre
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 08:56 +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > > OK for stage 1 (GCC 4.5), currently pretty much everything is frozen on
> > > mainline, except regressions (I hope stage 1 will open soon, since we have
> > > monthes of backlog of various fixes and new development blocked right now
> >
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 16:05 -0500, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>
> > Two obvious solutions: use Unsupress locally since there's already a others
> > handler or add explicit length checks.
>
> analysis looks right, an explicit length check is more a
Hi Robert,
Since there's only one ACATS FAIL on mipsel-linux I investigated it
and it looks like a-teioed.adb code is wrong in some case:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39221
<<
,.,. CXF3A01 ACATS 2.5 09-02-17 22:07:04
CXF3A01 Check that the Valid function from package
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 22:45 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> Thanks for the link!
>
> This confirms that all pch test fail on mipsel, from the first
> to the last log available on your site:
>
> http://people.debian.org/~doko/tmp/gcc-mips/gcc-snapshot_20080523-1
On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 10:52 -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 12:15 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >> The GNU Compiler Collection version 4.3.3 has been released.
> >>
> >> GCC 4.3.3 is a bug-fix release containing fixes for regressions and
> >> serious bugs in GCC 4.3.2. Thi
1 - 100 of 312 matches
Mail list logo
