me is below.
Regards,
Daniel
#include
#include
#define CNT 4
#define ATTR_INLINE __attribute__((hot, always_inline)) static inline
//#define ATTR_INLINE
ATTR_INLINE int func_1(int* data)
{
int buff[CNT * CNT];
for (int i = 0; i < CNT; ++i)
{
for (int j = 0; j < CN
bin/ld: cannot find -lstdc++
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
My questions are:
1. How can I generate and install libstdcxx?
2. Is there any tweak to be done on the linker (apart from LD_RUN_PATH, -L
and the above options)?
Regards,
Daniel
rick, but it doesn't seem to work for gcc.
Use CFLAGS="-g" ../gcc-src/configure. The top level file is still
autoconf 2.13.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Given all this, I posed this question to the gcc mailing list and
received a reply that directed me to the C++ ABI
(http://codesourcery.com/cxx-abi/), which is more detailed and has the
information I'm looking for. However, I need to confirm, in the case of
an FAA audit, that GCC 3.3.1 implements
we're far enough on yet to know the answer to this or
your other question, but I may be wrong. There's a reason we're
focusing on C right now :-) I don't think the design precludes this
sort of thing, but we won't know how it all fits together until more's
been done.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
>> As I understand it, it involves editing the mysql database by hand (well
>> by a script) instead of doing it inside bugzilla. Daniel Berlin has
>> done that the last couple of releases.
>
> I have checked in the attached patch to add this step to the branching
>
On 10/26/06, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is not a note, it's a statement. The problem with RTL loop notes
was that they were not statements, but rather markers, e.g. "a loop
starts/ends here". The LOOP_HEADER node, on the other hand, is more
like a placeholder for the result o
Latest messages:
/home/daniel/src/gcc-devel/gcc-build/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/home/daniel/src/gcc-devel/gcc-build/./prev-gcc/
-B/home/daniel/src/gcc-devel/gcc-install/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -O2 -g
-fomit-frame-pointer -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
-Wmissing-prototypes
4. Are you aware that the GMP home page says
[2006-05-04] GMP does not build on MacInteltosh machines. No fix
planned for GMP 4.x.
and indeed it does not appear to build correctly when configured on
my MacBook Pro?
Errr, well,
I have installed the version from macports on my macbook pro, and i
On 10/30/06, Geoffrey Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 30/10/2006, at 10:34 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>> 4. Are you aware that the GMP home page says
>>
>> [2006-05-04] GMP does not build on MacInteltosh machines. No fix
>> planned for GMP 4.x.
>>
>&
On 10/30/06, Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2006-10-30, at 21:37, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> Honestly, I don't know any mac people who *don't* use either fink or
> macports to install unix software when possible, because pretty much
> everything has req
ne" without "extern" when in C99
> mode.
Isn't the whole point that the current extern inline isn't
__always_inline__, but leaves it to the compiler's judgement?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ult causes all kinds of problems.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ply
> to xgcc, since it's only used in the build (right?).
No, xgcc is installed as gcc. If you have a dynamic libgmp, it will be
used.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On 11/5/06, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> AFAIK not one of the tree optimizers disables itself, but perhaps we
> should. The obvious candidates would be the ones that require
> recomputation of alias analysis, and the ones that don't update SSA
> info on the fly (i.e. require update_
On 11/5/06, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tree alias analysis can partially disable itself though:
>
> No, it can't. Tree alias representation can :)
I presume you're thinking of the pass that performs the analysis, while I was
more thinking of the global machinery; my understand
On 11/6/06, Ricardo FERNANDEZ PASCUAL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I have discovered that volatile expresions can cause the tree-ssa
pre pass to loop forever in "compute_antic". The problem seems to be
that the expresion is assigned a different value number at each
iteration, hence the
The problem with trying to solve this problem on a per pass basis rather
than coming up with an integrate solution is that we are completely
leaving the user out of the thought process.
There are some uses who have big machines or a lot of time on their
hands and want the damn the torpedoes full
> It will load the value from memory, true, but who says that the store to
> memory will happen before that? The compiler is allowed to reorder the
> statements since it "knows" that foo and *arg cannot alias.
>
If the compiler is smart enough to know how to reorder the statements,
then it shoul
On 11/10/06, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 10, 2006, at 12:46 PM, H. J. Lu wrote:
> Will use C++ help or hurt compiler parallelism? Does it really matter?
I'm not an expert, but, in the simple world I want, I want it to not
matter in the least. For the people writing most code in
Hm. If you're going to reorder these things, then I would expect either
an error or a warning at that point, because you really do know that a
reference to an uninitialized variable is happening.
We do warn when we see an uninitialized value if -Wuninitialized is on.
We don't warn at every poin
rs on global readonly, but in typical compilation
most of the memory allocated is definitely global. Past a certain
point much of that is probably readonly. However, it would take some
clever interfaces and discipline to _guarantee_ that any particular
global bit was shareable.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
> > whole-program optimisation and SMP machines have been around for a
> > fair while now, so I'm guessing not.
>
> I don't know of anything that is particularly hard about it, but, if
> you know of bits that are hard, or have pointer to such, I'd be
> interested in it.
You imply you're consider
up. We ought
to be able to emit (somewhat smaller) unwind information which doesn't
reference the personality routine if it's going to have nothing to do,
shouldn't we?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
't amenable to
_Unwind_Backtrace / _Unwind_ForcedUnwind, et cetera. For .eh_frame,
though, the personality routine is only necessary to run cleanups
and check exception specs.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 05:11:39PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > If you try what Michael's been saying, you'll notice that trivial
> > C++ files get the personality routine reference even if they don't
> > have anything with a
If i ctrl-c a gcc bootstrap in the middle of building a stage (IE when
it's compiling, not when it's configuring), make clean no longer works
properly.
It used to a few months ago
Now I get:
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop.
make: *** [clean-stage4-gcc] Error 2
(with the error
e move of toplevel to
> 2.59; I'm not sure what's holding that up now all subdirectories of gcc
> and src have been moved.)
At this point I believe there are no more blockers. Steve Ellcey would
be the person to ask.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On 11/14/06, Sashan Govender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
I was looking at the vectorizer
(http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/tree-ssa/vectorization.html) and noticed
that in section 6 it says that there is no data dependence graph
implemented. Also had a search throught the mailing list archives and
On 11/16/06, Alvaro Vega Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
I'm beginning to work on GGCC project(1) and I proposed to continue with
DejaGNU Testsuite for these project when I was asked about better
testing framework. Then I read about "QMTest and the G++ testsuite"
thread (2) of year 2002
SVN revision: 118945
Host: i686-pc-linux-gnu
/home/daniel/svn-build/gcc-head/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/daniel/svn-build/gcc-head/./g
cc/ -B/home/daniel/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-svn//i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/home/dan
iel/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-svn//i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /home/daniel/i686
-pc
On 11/17/06, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 12:22 -0500, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> I just tried compiling cplusplus_grammer.ii with mainline, checking
> disabled, and had to stop it after 30 minutes (use to be <50 seconds on
> my x86-linux box). A quick check with
a a. Conditional jumps in GIMPLE are not true three-address-code since they
specify two (2) branch targets (in their general form). E.g.:
if (cond) then
goto target1;
else
goto target2;
IMHO, this should be split (or at least made splittable) into:
if (cond) then
goto target1;
if (!cond)
On 11/18/06, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Zdenek, all,
Is this something that could be easily fixed? E.g. can we make it
that flow_loops_find only performs transformations if asked to (by
adding a function argument for that)?
Why not have a flow_canonicalize_loops that does
-
Regards
Daniel
P.S. I can neither confirm nor (re-)assign PR28209 to myself ...?!
In the meantime, is there a simple way to disable this "more correct"
mechanism so I can get my timings?
You'll get testsuite failures if you disable it because it fixes a
bunch of bugs.
You can always disable all of PTA, but i would not recommend it.
With the attached patch, it should take l
config file fastjar/configure.ac has the
enable-...-srcdir flag, libiberty/configure.ac does not.
Thanks
Daniel
On Thursday 23 November 2006 05:11, you wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 22:52 +0100, Daniel Franke wrote:
> > The tarball of 4.1.1 includes fastjar/fastjar.info, but not
> > libiberty/libiberty.info. The config file fastjar/configure.ac has the
> > enable-...-srcdir flag, l
esn't quite at present; powerpc64-gnu does not include
t-ppccomm. powerpc-gnu does.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
inite loop in configure for this
case?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
all in the divmodsi4 define_expand, or should I change the ABI
to be different for that one function, if possible?
thanks,
dan.
--
========
Daniel Towner
picoChip Designs Ltd, Riverside Buildings, 108, Walcot Street, BATH, BA1
On 11/28/06, Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dear All (and especially those implied in the GCC internal garbage
collector).
I read (and contributed a bit to) http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Memory_management
and also read http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Type-Information.html
Howev
> I think there are 3 aliasing possibilities here:
> 1. known to alias
> 2. known to not alias
> 3. may alias
Actually there is only 2, it may alias or not.
Actually, he's right (and both you and Richard are wrong).
The standard taxonomy of classifications for two memory accesses is:
Must-ali
iners first, but haven't heard back
from any of them...)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
BTW, I am surprised that it is not easy to know which organizations exactly
has signed such legal papers. It could happen (in big organizations) that
such an assignment has been signed, and a putative minor contributor to GCC
does not know about it yet.
There is a copyright list on gnu.org machi
On 12/1/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/1/06, Uros Bizjak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> At least on x86_64 and i686 SPEC score [1] and polyhedron [2] scores
> dropped noticeably. For SPEC benchmarks, mgrid, galgel, ammp and
> sixtrack tests are affected and for pol
On 12/1/06, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My bootstrap/make check cycle took about 10 hours with yesterdays
checkout (way longer than expected). A quick investigation shows C++
compilation timed are through the roof.
10 hours?
Using quick (in theory) and trusty cpgram.ii, I get:
On 12/1/06, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 13:49 -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On 12/1/06, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My bootstrap/make check cycle took about 10 hours with yesterdays
> > checkout (way long
On 12/1/06, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 13:49 -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On 12/1/06, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My bootstrap/make check cycle took about 10 hours with yesterdays
> > checkout (way long
On 12/1/06, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's a bunch of related issues, some kernel, some gcc,
thus the Cc from hell on that one.
First of all, in theory the timers in kernel are done that way:
* they have callback of type void (*)(unsigned long)
* they have dat
Cancel that, it's a local change of mine causing the breakage :)
On 12/5/06, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Aldy, your tuples change broke teh build on i686-darwin.
I've attached a file that fails, it should fail with a cross compiler.
On 12/5/06, Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello
I am not sure to understand what if_marked or deletable means in GTY context
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/GTY-Options.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Memory_management
I want to have a GTY() garbage collected structure such
I'm not sure to understand what Daniel suggests. If he dreams of a
better memory handling than the current GGC, I certainly agree; I
actually dream of a GCC future compiler where every data is garbage
collected in a copying generational scheme (see my Qish
experiment). This would require
On 12/9/06, Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 07:09:23PM -0500, Daniel Berlin écrivait/wrote:
> You see, we currently waste a lot of memory to avoid the fact that our
> GC is very slow.
> We still take it on the chin when it comes to loca
On 12/9/06, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hi,
> I want to know that the patch at
> "http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-01/msg00211.html"; submitted for
> which version of gcc?
> How can we know that any of patch submitted , that for which version?
>
On 12/10/06, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2006
Reply-To:
Hi Daniel,
Do you have access to SPEC CPU 2006?
No, i don't, only SPEC CPU 2000.
Your patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-12/msg00225.html
causes gcc 4.3 to miscompile 464.h264ref in SPEC CPU 2006 with
Hey, by chance does the attached fix it?
On 12/10/06, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/10/06, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2006
> Reply-To:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Do you have access to SPEC CPU 2006?
No, i don't, only SPEC CPU 2000.
>
On 12/11/06, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:42:35PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 12:27:07AM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > Hey, by chance does the attached fix it?
> >
>
> Yes, it fixes 464.h264ref with the test i
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 10:19:12AM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> In other words, should I make all my configurable flag visible by the
> toplevel configure and propagated (thru Makefile.tpl) to gcc/ or not?
No, you shouldn't. Only add them to subdirs that need them.
--
Daniel
Applying io_quotes_use to x86_64-linux/sys/mount.h
Applying io_quotes_use to x86_64-linux/sys/raw.h
Some pointers/help how to address this issue would be appreciated.
Regards
Daniel
On 12/21/06, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Kennedy wrote on 12/21/06 11:37:
> The situation is that some SSA_NAMEs are disused (removed from the
> code) without being released onto the free list by
> release_ssa_name().
>
Yes, it happens if a name is put into the set of names t
I may be missing something, but I don't think that is the interesting
issue here.
I agree.
I think the issue is whether we want to have a way to see all
currently valid SSA_NAMEs. Right now we can have SSA_NAMEs in the
list which are no longer used, and we have no way to tell whether they
a
On 12/21/06, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote on 12/21/06 12:21:
> for (i = 0; i < num_ssa_names; i++)
> {
> tree name = ssa_name (i);
> if (name && !SSA_NAME_IN_FREELIST (name)
>DFS (name)
>
I see that you are not checkin
On 12/21/06, Robert Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert, can you attach the testcase you've been working with?
One testcase is libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/vec.cc from mainline.
But it compiles without trouble unless you add verification or a walk
over the SSA_NAMEs at the right time.
> 1. W
/gcc-head/gcc
-I../../../svn/gcc-head/gcc/build -I../../../svn/gcc-head/gcc/../include
-I../../../svn/gcc-head/gcc/../libcpp/include
-I/data/home/daniel/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/gmp-4.2.1/include
-I/data/home/daniel/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/mpfr-2.2.1/include
-I../../../svn/gcc-head/gcc
On Saturday 23 December 2006 23:35, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-12-23 at 18:32 +0100, Daniel Franke wrote:
> > host: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
> > revision: r120172
>
> Even though I could not reproduce this failure. The problem is simple
> and obvious. vec.c
ween _stext and _etext are recorded.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On 12/28/06, Christian Sturz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I was curious if there are any gcc compiler optimizations that can
improve this code:
void foo10( )
{
for ( int i = 0; i < 10; ++i )
{
[...]
if( i == 15 ) { [BLOCK1] }
}
}
void foo100( )
{
for ( int i = 0; i < 100; ++i
On 29 Dec 2006 07:55:59 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * NEWS: AC_PROG_CC, AC_PROG_CXX, and AC_PROG_OBJC now take an
> optional second argument specifying the default optimization
> options for GCC. These optimizati
On 29 Dec 2006 19:33:29 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| In fact, what they told me was that since they made their change in
| 1991, they have had *1* person who reported a program that didn'
On 29 Dec 2006 20:15:01 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 29 Dec 2006 19:33:29 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > "Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On 29 Dec 2006 21:04:08 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| Basically, your argument boils down to "all supporting data is wrong,
Really?
Or were you just
# You can have all the sarcasm you
nt on the list, please ask the Steering Committee.
This is a textbook example of what they're for.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
e been saying that since
the first top level bootstrap rules went in, every time the subject
came up - this really shouldn't be a surprise.
Libgcc will no longer be configured by the gcc subdirectory's makefile.
Therefore there will be no startfiles or libgcc for the new compiler to
use.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
compiler is not functional. It can't use libgcc
or crtbegin from the system; they might not even exist, depending on
your bootstrap compiler.
Do you mean something different by "bootstrapping just the compiler"?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On 12/29/06, Richard Kenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure what data you're asking for.
Here's the data *I'd* like to see:
(1) What is the maximum performance loss that can be shown using a real
program (e.g,. one in SPEC) and some compiler (not necessarily GCC) when
one assumes wrap
On 12/29/06, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/29/06, Richard Kenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not sure what data you're asking for.
>
> Here's the data *I'd* like to see:
>
> (1) What is the maximum performance loss that
Just to address the other compiler issue
No, they will work on other compilers, since 'configure'
won't use -O2 with those other compilers.
icc defaults to -O2 without any options, so unless you are passing
-O0, it will enable this.
Unless you know of some real-world C compiler that breaks
would even be possible to not bootstrap those host libraries
- but unwise for the reasons we wanted them bootstrapped originally,
and they're very quick to build.
In a combined tree we bootstrap binutils too. That's less obviously
useful. But in a GCC-only tree we bootstrap intl, gcc, libcpp,
libdecnumber, libiberty, and zlib: all things linked directly into
the compiler.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
e configure-time decision - if there's
a convincing reason to do so.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On 12/31/06, Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Steven Bosscher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 12/31/06, Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Also, as I understand it this change shouldn't affect gcc's
>> SPEC benchmark scores, since they're typically done with -O3
>> or better.
>
>
On 12/31/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/31/06, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/31/06, Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Steven Bosscher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On 12/31/06
On 12/31/06, Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote:
>> Admittedly it's only two small tests, and it's with 4.1.1. But that's
>> two more tests than the -fwrapv naysayers have done, on
>> bread-and-butter applications like coreutils
LES error message really ought to (A) get logged in
config.log, and (B) tell you why it decided link tests were forbidden.
(And it's my fault originally IIRC.)
I'm not at all sure how the nm failure ends up leading to this problem,
but I'll take your word for that part.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
and
<http://www.suse.de/~gcctest/SPEC/CINT/sb-vangelis-head-64/recent.html>.
Daniel Berlin and Geert Bosch disagreed about how to interpret
these results; see <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-01/msg00034.html>.
Also, the benchmarks results use -O3 and so aren't directly
applicable
e problem is usually obvious.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
urposes, but the next one is the GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES test, and that one
> should have worked.
Unfortunately, when it fails, the error does not get logged properly.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
e.ac), we'll
be untangling them. Eventually, it should be possible to build
gcc and the target libraries separately.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 04:19:17PM +1100, Ben Elliston wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 23:28 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > Right now the libgcc configuration is completely tied up with
> > gcc/Makefile. As parts of the configuration process move from
> > gcc/confi
0/
> but rather into /lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/.
> Is this related to the recent libgcc changes?
Yes, it's my fault. The last time I tested make install, they went to
the right place. I'm building right now to find out what's gone wrong.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 08:59:51AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 02:32:19PM +0100, Martin Reinecke wrote:
> > /usr/bin/ld: crtbegin.o: No such file: No such file or directory
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >
> > This probably happe
Guys, i changed the cookie prevent this error, and to stop it from
continually asking for logins.
Please clear your current gcc.gnu.org bugzilla cookie from your
browser, or both this error, and getting asked for logins on every
page, will continue.
-- Forwarded message --
From:
ed, removed.
The latter; feel free to remove them :-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On 1/4/07, Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote:
> Guys, i changed the cookie prevent this error, and to stop it from
> continually asking for logins.
I'm not sure to understand, I never had problems before...
Others have :)
> Please clear your
as rather
> reasonable, but you and other build machinery wizards convinced us that this
> would be a pain to support with toplevel bootstrap. So what has changed?
Not much. I'm convinced it would be feasible, but definitely not easy,
so I wanted to see how much interest there was - seems like some, but
not a lot.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ister usage but still have no idea.
>
> I would *really* appreciate any help I can get on this issue!
Take a look at -ffixed-REG.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
e support into the 4.2 branch?
I have no intention of touching the build system for the release
branch, in any case.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
he functionality otherwise lost.
>
> Or do I misunderstand?
We're not talking about that at all. I was only talking about whether
the decision was made at configure or make time.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ought to get it working.
And I certainly don't have time to do it before 4.2.0.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ebian packaged one; Debian's compilers
default to generating code for a 486 or later.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
1 - 100 of 2005 matches
Mail list logo
