On Nov 22, 2013, at 10:13 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> This is exactly the patch referenced in the pointer to the upstream repo.
>> Arno, does this fix the build for you?
>>
>> Ok?
>
> Yes
Committed revision 205285.
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 07:21:07PM +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > This is exactly the patch referenced in the pointer to the upstream repo.
> > Arno, does this fix the build for you?
>
> Well now I encounter:
>
> /users/charlet/fsf/trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc: In
> f
> This is exactly the patch referenced in the pointer to the upstream repo.
> Arno, does this fix the build for you?
Well now I encounter:
/users/charlet/fsf/trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc: In
function '__sanitizer::uptr __sanitizer::internal_filesize(__sanitizer::fd_t)':
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:11:18AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2013, at 4:31 AM, Konstantin Serebryany
> wrote:
> > These CFI directives were completely removed in upstream at
> > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=192196&view=rev
> > Strangely, this did not get into the last merge
On Nov 22, 2013, at 4:31 AM, Konstantin Serebryany
wrote:
> These CFI directives were completely removed in upstream at
> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=192196&view=rev
> Strangely, this did not get into the last merge...
>
> Anyway, these cfi_* will (should, at least) disappear with th
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 7:00 PM, FX wrote:
>> /users/charlet/fsf/trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc:
>> Assembler messages:
>> /users/charlet/fsf/trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc:821:
>> Error: .cfi_endproc without corresponding .cfi_startproc
>> :21485:
> /users/charlet/fsf/trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc:
> Assembler messages:
> /users/charlet/fsf/trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc:821:
> Error: .cfi_endproc without corresponding .cfi_startproc
> :21485: Error: open CFI at the end of file; missing .cfi
On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 12:30 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
> > Yes, it only seems to be a problem with SUSE kernels:
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-11/msg00090.html
>
> As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
> p
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:36:47PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:19:26PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> >> > As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
> >>
> >> Sorry. Which
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Konstantin Serebryany
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:19:26PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>>> > As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
>>>
>>> Sorry. Which one?
>>
>> I bel
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:19:26PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> > As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
>>
>> Sorry. Which one?
>
> I believe richi meant
> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849180
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:19:26PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> > As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
>
> Sorry. Which one?
I believe richi meant
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849180
Martin
>
> > partners (hint! hint!) would raise this issue via
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Konstantin Serebryany
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 12:47:17PM +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>>> > >>> Looks like another issue for the libsanitizer maintainers.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I've been doing bootstrap
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 12:47:17PM +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> > >>> Looks like another issue for the libsanitizer maintainers.
>> > >>
>> > >> I've been doing bootstraps, but didn't see this because the
>> > >> kernel header linux/vt.h u
> As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
Sorry. Which one?
> partners (hint! hint!) would raise this issue via the appropriate
> channel ;)
>
> Richard.
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 12:47:17PM +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > >>> Looks like another issue for the libsanitizer maintainers.
> > >>
> > >> I've been doing bootstraps, but didn't see this because the
> > >> kernel header linux/vt.h use on the RHEL6 system I was doing
> > >> builds on has that
> > Would appreciate a fix/work around!
>
> Configure with --disable-libsanitizer.
Will do, thanks.
> Would appreciate a fix/work around!
Configure with --disable-libsanitizer.
--
Eric Botcazou
> >>> Looks like another issue for the libsanitizer maintainers.
> >>
> >> I've been doing bootstraps, but didn't see this because the
> >> kernel header linux/vt.h use on the RHEL6 system I was doing
> >> builds on has that field renamed. Looking at our SLES11
> >> devel system I do see the probl
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 21 November 2013 21:17, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> On Thu, 2013-11-21 at 16:03 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>> Looks like another issue for the libsanitizer maintainers.
>>
>> I've been doing bootstraps, but didn't see this because the
>>
> Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > I am testing patch for that still.
> > The current version is (updated per Joseph's comment about COMDAT making
> > sence
> > on !PUBLIC functions).
> >
> Thanks Honza, I just built successfully r154128
Note that there are still testsuite regressions found by the sanit
Jan Hubicka wrote:
> I am testing patch for that still.
> The current version is (updated per Joseph's comment about COMDAT making sence
> on !PUBLIC functions).
>
Thanks Honza, I just built successfully r154128
Paolo.*
*
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> the build is currently, ie 154122, broken in libstdc++-v3:
>
> ./src/system_error.cc:95:1: internal compiler error:
> Segmentation fault
>
> Version 154120 works fine for me.
FWIW, seen for cris-elf too. (Worked: r154119, failed from: r154122.)
> Hi,
>
> the build is currently, ie 154122, broken in libstdc++-v3:
>
> ./src/system_error.cc:95:1: internal compiler error:
> Segmentation fault
>
> Version 154120 works fine for me.
I am testing patch for that still.
The current version is (updated per Joseph's comment about COMDAT ma
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Richard Guenther
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Does anybody else see build failure on 4_3 branch? My build from a
>> clean dir (./configure --with-mpfr=/usr/local) dies with
> It works for me. Maybe you have a too high -j and some dependencies
> are missing? W
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Uros Bizjak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Does anybody else see build failure on 4_3 branch? My build from a
> clean dir (./configure --with-mpfr=/usr/local) dies with
>
> gcc -c -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
> -Wwrite-strings -Wstri
On Mar 6, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
Mike Stump schrieb:
I have a feeling sed -i isn't our friend.
fixed.
I can confirm that this fixed my build. I'm expected the regression
tester to follow shortly.
Thanks.
Mike Stump schrieb:
It appears that one of these:
+ '[' -s .bad_compare ']'
+ exit 1
I have a feeling sed -i isn't our friend.
fixed.
Matthias
2007-03-06 Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* doc/Makefile.am(gkeytool.pod): Don't use sed -i.
* doc/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
28 matches
Mail list logo
