https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54447
--- Comment #2 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
Sorry I no longer recall the details from 5 years ago, but it seems that I have
managed to build later versions of gcc 3 years ago:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2014-01/msg00048.html
and I seemed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64390
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64390
--- Comment #3 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
I wonder if it isn't '-shared' but that a mixture of object files and archives
are being used. See also:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27372667/undefined-reference-cross-compiling-static-libraries-with-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64390
--- Comment #1 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/bin/gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.9.2/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: htl10 at users dot sourceforge.net
Upgrading to 4.9.2 from 4.8.x, building R (http://www.r-project.org) with fto
fails. ("./configure --enable-lto AR=gcc-ar").
Specifica
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53831
--- Comment #38 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
This is the only reference I have about the redhat specific patch. (from
redhat's binutils packaging git). I think "H.J." is "H.J.Lu" but I can't find
anything further - I am hoping there is an updated patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53831
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||htl10 at users dot
sourceforge.net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57792
--- Comment #18 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
(In reply to m...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #15)
> Mandating commands line tools is fine. Would be nice if everything worked
> flawlessly if no optional package had to be installed, but I'm pragmatic.
The c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57792
--- Comment #14 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
(In reply to howarth from comment #13)
>
> If we made any change, I would rather it be a check in FSF gcc's
> configure for the presence of /usr/include on darwin which provided the
> appropriate error m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57792
--- Comment #12 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
(In reply to howarth from comment #10)
> This change was reverted when Apple abandoned the idea of removing the
> /usr/include. They didn't appreciate the number of packages (like python)
> which would requi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57792
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||htl10 at users dot
sourceforge.net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54448
--- Comment #6 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
The latest with 4.6.4 and 4.7.3 :
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2014-01/msg00048.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2014-01/msg00049.html
seems to be a lot healthier.
During the course of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #43 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #40)
> Please try this on your system and tell us how you end up with
> bootstrap-debug instead of none.
Hmm, sorry, redherring. I think I found the di
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #42 from Hin-Tak Leung ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #40)
> if GNU cmp is installed. compare-debug doesn't take this into account,
> so if I manually run this code snippet from configure
>
> if echo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54448
--- Comment #5 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-28 15:51:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> How is GCC configured?
Just "/where/source/is/configure" with no options. You can see it at the bottom
of :
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54698
--- Comment #6 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-25 08:07:43 UTC ---
Hmm... I still think I saw it at least twice so I stopped using -j X in my
recent runs of checking many of gcc 4.3.x-4.7.x on tru64. Does "make -k check"
try to make the languag
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54448
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.3.3, 4.3.6, 4.4.1, 4.4.7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54698
--- Comment #2 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-25 03:53:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> It works for me and I have been using -j5 even -j32 recently too.
with "-k"?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54698
Bug #: 54698
Summary: make -j 3 -k check, trying to do parallel check at the
top level, go around in circles.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54697
Bug #: 54697
Summary: testsuite in gcc 4.7.x leaves zombie processes.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #38 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-14 14:43:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> I've no idea why gmp 4.3.x or 5.x works for you: both fail make check
> for me if built with gcc 4.4.2. I've not yet tried newer versions.
probably sligh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.4.1 |
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.3.3 |4.6.0, 4.6.2, 4.6.3, 4.7.0,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40894
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.3.6
--- Comment #14 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40894
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.1
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54448
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #19 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-01 14:31:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> 4.4.6 fails, 4.5.x fails earlier in a different Bug 44959 ; 4.6.1 works so
> closing.
After editing config/bootstrap-debug.mk as in (
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #32 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-01 11:22:55 UTC ---
Went back to 4.5.0 and commenting out '#STAGE2_CFLAGS += -gtoggle' in
config/bootstrap-debug.mk have it going beyond stage2/3 comparison. So I don't
know how I managed to build 4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54448
Bug #: 54448
Summary: many failures with /sbin/loader: Error:
libstdc++.so.6: symbol "__pthread_mutex_init"
unresolved
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #30 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-01 08:18:06 UTC ---
I commented out gcc-4.7.1/config/bootstrap-debug.mk :
#STAGE2_CFLAGS += -gtoggle
and 4.7.1 passed.
this seems likely the cause - -gtoogle was introduced in 4.5.x. I am going to
try
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54447
Bug #: 54447
Summary: gmp in source does not work on alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #29 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-09-01 02:53:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 28115
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28115
sets of failed-to-compare objs from 4.7.1
tgz'ed, failed-to-compared obj's from 4.7.1 .
stage2 alw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48251
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||htl10 at users dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #28 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-08-30 17:32:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> > There are two curious things:
> > 1. why does the 2nd stage drops to only about 600 byte. (I assume 20-30k is
> > normal).
>
> That's certainly complet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #27 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-08-30 14:56:46 UTC ---
FWIW, I just filed the MFPR 3.1.x "make check" issue:
https://gforge.inria.fr/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=14806&group_id=136&atid=619
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #26 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-08-30 14:19:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> The sentence about newer versions is there for a reason. In fact, on
> Tru64 UNIX the situation is even worse: gmp 4.3.2 make check fails for
> me, so I'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27346|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #23 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-05-08 20:48:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> > --- Comment #21 from Hin-Tak Leung
> > 2012-05-08 14:15:52 UTC ---
>
> I think there was a misunderstanding: I specificially asked for the
> smallest
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #21 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-05-08 14:15:52 UTC ---
There are two curious things:
1. why does the 2nd stage drops to only about 600 byte. (I assume 20-30k is
normal).
2. I did have a success with 4.6.1 (and I believe with both make/ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #20 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-05-08 14:08:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 27348
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27348
3rd set of those checksum files. tar.gz'ed
This one is from 4.6.2 (the other two from 4.6.1), just
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #19 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-05-08 14:07:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 27347
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27347
another set of those checksum files. tar.gz'ed
I think this one is from make bootstrap4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #18 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-05-08 14:05:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 27346
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27346
one set of those checksum files. tar.gz'ed
I think this one is from 4.6.1, make bootstrap4-lean
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.6.3
--- Comment #16 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40894
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40894
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
--- Comment #11 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.4.5, 4.6.1
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
--- Comment #6 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-08-03 22:26:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Please follow the directions I gave in that PR. Start with a standard
> configure; make setup, no bootstrap-lean4, no relative paths to the
> source dir.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
--- Comment #16 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
--- Comment #13 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #12 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-08-03 15:29:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Did you use an absolute path for the source dir? There have been
> problems with relative paths in the past.
Tried absolute path with 4.6.1, and compilat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #14 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-08-02 23:31:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> One other possible problem: please avoid relative pathnames to configure and
> an object directory that is a subdir of the source tree. Better do (say)
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #10 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-08-02 11:08:25 UTC ---
> Please try a 4.6.1 tarball and *don't* use relative paths to configure/build
> in
> a subdir of the source tree. I bootstrap gcc (4.5 to 4.7) on Tru64 UNIX all
> the time and neve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
--- Comment #4 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-08-02 11:03:23 UTC ---
> Apart from that, why are you wasting your time with GCC 4.4 which I don't test
any longer? GCC 4.5 and 4.6 should be fine and have seen lots of bug fixes.
4.5 does not build correc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
--- Comment #1 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-05-01 22:46:34 UTC ---
attachment posted as:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-05/msg00074.html
after prepending with some notes.
Mentioned the issue but forgot to mention the actual bug number, bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
Summary: [regression] lot more libgomp testsuite failures
compared to 4.4.5
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.6
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40894
--- Comment #10 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-05-01 22:30:55 UTC ---
Could this be some kind of text<->num conversion bug? I can't help but thinking
0x31 is '1' in ascii character, which is 0x01 in value.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40894
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.4.6
--- Comment #9 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46967
--- Comment #6 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-05-01 22:24:08 UTC ---
Filed Bug 48841 for the alphaev68 libgomp failure and attached my test summary,
in case somebody wants to compare to hppa 4.4.6.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46967
--- Comment #5 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-05-01 22:02:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Regarding comment #3, look at the libgomp test log file to see why the
> tests are failing on alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a. I'm certain the problem
> is different
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46967
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||htl10 at users dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #11 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-05-01 10:14:49 UTC ---
This really looks like a libtool/automake/autoconf problem, and it seems that
libjava has its own libtool bundle?
Anyway, upgrading the system libtool to 2.4 does not improve.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #10 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-04-30 20:46:02 UTC ---
Just upgrading from libtool 2.2 to 2.4 to see if that works. This looks
relevant
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2010-08/msg00305.html ?
since the next to current l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #9 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-04-30 19:01:44 UTC ---
The last part of the 4.4.6 failure:
--
libtool: link: (cd ".libs" && rm -f "libgcj-tools.so.10" && ln -s
"libgcj-tools.so.10.0.0" "libgcj-tools.so.10")
libtool: link: (cd "
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.4.6
--- Comment #8 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.5.3
--- Comment #8 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.6.0
--- Comment #7 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.5.2
--- Comment #5 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.4.5
--- Comment #7 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #6 from Hin-Tak Leung
2010-12-16 00:22:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 22778
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22778
alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a/libjava/config.log from 4.4.5
4.4.5, alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a/libjava/config.log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40894
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.5.0, 4.5.1
--- Comment #3 from Hin-Tak
76 matches
Mail list logo
