On Mar 8, 2015, at 10:38 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> +Ian
> + ping
So, all the darwinness of the patch looks fine to me. One maintainer down,
just need libiberty approval.
If the work becomes too bothersome, the comment out the line and say, # does’t
work with libcc1 approach for the config frag
Iain Sandoe writes:
> +Ian
> + ping
The patch is missing the change to maint-tool to generate the
rules at the bottom of libiberty/Makefile.in.
Right now the libiberty Makefile does not require GNU make, and it's not
clear to me that we want to push that dependency onto all projects that
use li
+Ian
+ ping
On 11 Feb 2015, at 14:37, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> On 9 Feb 2015, at 14:47, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>> On 02/01/15 09:42, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>>
>>> This is a GCC5 bootstrap regression on 32bit Darwin hosts ( I can raise a
>>> PR if that is considered necessary).
>> Has this b
Hi Jeff,
On 9 Feb 2015, at 14:47, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 02/01/15 09:42, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>
>> This is a GCC5 bootstrap regression on 32bit Darwin hosts ( I can raise a PR
>> if that is considered necessary).
> Has this been addressed or is it still pending?
I believe it's still awaiting rev
On 02/01/15 09:42, Iain Sandoe wrote:
This is a GCC5 bootstrap regression on 32bit Darwin hosts ( I can raise a PR if
that is considered necessary).
Has this been addressed or is it still pending?
In fact it is not libcc1, but libiberty that is the cause -
On 26 Jan 2015, at 14:13, Rainer
This is a GCC5 bootstrap regression on 32bit Darwin hosts ( I can raise a PR if
that is considered necessary).
In fact it is not libcc1, but libiberty that is the cause -
On 26 Jan 2015, at 14:13, Rainer Orth wrote:
> FX writes:
>
>>> The default BOOT_CFLAGS are: -O2 -g -mdynamic-no-pic
>>>
On 26 Jan 2015, at 14:13, Rainer Orth wrote:
> FX writes:
>
>>> The default BOOT_CFLAGS are: -O2 -g -mdynamic-no-pic
>>> the libiberty pic build appends: -fno-common (and not even -fPIC) [NB
>>> -fPIC _won't_ override -mdynamic-no-pic, so that's not a simple way out]
>>> This means that the PIC
FX writes:
>> The default BOOT_CFLAGS are: -O2 -g -mdynamic-no-pic
>> the libiberty pic build appends: -fno-common (and not even -fPIC) [NB
>> -fPIC _won't_ override -mdynamic-no-pic, so that's not a simple way out]
>> This means that the PIC library is being built with non-pic relocs.
>
> config
On 05/12/2014 23:47, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:34:28PM +0100, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>>> As I've tried to explain, that is IMHO wrong though.
>>> If what you are after is the -B stuff too, then perhaps:
>>> ...
>>
>> Sorry but it does not work:
>
> Sorry, make that (j
This was for x86_64-apple-darwin14. The patch also works for
x86_64-apple-darwin10.
Dominique
> Le 6 déc. 2014 à 01:49, Dominique d'Humières a écrit :
>
> Bootstrap just finished with the patch.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dominique
Hi Jeff,
On 5 Dec 2014, at 22:40, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/05/14 15:34, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>>> As I've tried to explain, that is IMHO wrong though.
>>> If what you are after is the -B stuff too, then perhaps:
>>> ...
>>
>> Sorry but it does not work:
> BTW, thanks for working with Jakub o
Bootstrap just finished with the patch.
Thanks,
Dominique
> Le 5 déc. 2014 à 23:47, Jakub Jelinek a écrit :
>
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:34:28PM +0100, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>>> As I've tried to explain, that is IMHO wrong though.
>>> If what you are after is the -B stuff too, then perh
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:34:28PM +0100, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
> > As I've tried to explain, that is IMHO wrong though.
> > If what you are after is the -B stuff too, then perhaps:
> > ...
>
> Sorry but it does not work:
Sorry, make that (just removed 4x ' in each file):
2014-12-05 Jakub
On 05/12/14 22:40, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/05/14 15:34, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>>> As I've tried to explain, that is IMHO wrong though.
>>> If what you are after is the -B stuff too, then perhaps:
>>> ...
>>
>> Sorry but it does not work:
> BTW, thanks for working with Jakub on this. We're goi
On 12/05/14 15:34, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
As I've tried to explain, that is IMHO wrong though.
If what you are after is the -B stuff too, then perhaps:
...
Sorry but it does not work:
BTW, thanks for working with Jakub on this. We're going to be getting a
Darwin box for Jakub and other fo
> As I've tried to explain, that is IMHO wrong though.
> If what you are after is the -B stuff too, then perhaps:
> ...
Sorry but it does not work:
true DO=all multi-do # make
make[4]: Leaving directory '/opt/gcc/build_w/libbacktrace'
make[3]: Leaving directory '/opt/gcc/build_w/libbacktrace'
ma
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 08:11:53PM +0100, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
> > ...
> > Can you please test it on Darwin (or whatever other target has similar
> > issues with bootstrapping libcc1)?
> >
> > 2014-12-05 Jakub Jelinek
> > ...
>
> The patch does not work for x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0. Howe
> ...
> Can you please test it on Darwin (or whatever other target has similar
> issues with bootstrapping libcc1)?
>
> 2014-12-05 Jakub Jelinek
> ...
The patch does not work for x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0. However the following
patch does:
--- ../_clean/Makefile.in 2014-11-26 23:09:14.0
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 01:06:45AM +0100, FX wrote:
> tl;dr: One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to toplevel
> configure.ac
>
> ---
>
> I’m looked into the issue some more, and am comparing two builds of trunk
> (exact same source), one configured with system
On 4 Dec 2014, at 15:24, FX wrote:
>> Can you try adding it as
>>
>> T_CFLAGS += -mdynamic-no-pic
>>
>> in gcc/config/t-tarwin instead?
>
-mdynamic-no-pic should be used to build *host* executable stuff for m32 darwin.
It is not suitable for building shared libraries (hence the problem with
> Can you try adding it as
>
> T_CFLAGS += -mdynamic-no-pic
>
> in gcc/config/t-tarwin instead?
Nope, doing so fails to link libgcc_s.dylib:
/Users/fx/devel/gcc/i/./gcc/xgcc -B/Users/fx/devel/gcc/i/./gcc/
-B/Users/fx/devel/gcc/i2/i386-apple-darwin14.0.0/bin/
-B/Users/fx/devel/gcc/i2/i386-appl
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Hi Rainer,
>
> On 4 Dec 2014, at 13:32, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
>> FX writes:
>>
>>> 10-days ping
>>> This restores bootstrap on a secondary target, target maintainer is OK with
>>> it. I think I need build maintainers approval, so please review.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:52 PM, FX wrote:
>> The default BOOT_CFLAGS are: -O2 -g -mdynamic-no-pic
>> the libiberty pic build appends: -fno-common (and not even -fPIC) [NB -fPIC
>> _won't_ override -mdynamic-no-pic, so that's not a simple way out]
>> This means that the PIC library is being built
> The default BOOT_CFLAGS are: -O2 -g -mdynamic-no-pic
> the libiberty pic build appends: -fno-common (and not even -fPIC) [NB -fPIC
> _won't_ override -mdynamic-no-pic, so that's not a simple way out]
> This means that the PIC library is being built with non-pic relocs.
config/mh-darwin says tha
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>> Hi Rainer,
>>>
>>> On 4 Dec 2014, at 13:32, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>>
FX writes:
> 10-days ping
> This restore
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> Hi Rainer,
>>
>> On 4 Dec 2014, at 13:32, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>
>>> FX writes:
>>>
10-days ping
This restores bootstrap on a secondary target, target maintainer is OK with
FX writes:
>> While in my testing, 64-bit Mac OS X 10.10.1 (x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0)
>> now bootstraps, but 32-bit (i386-apple-darwin14.0.0) does not:
>
> Is it due to my patch, or pre-existing bootstrap failure?
I can't tell: before your patch, 32-bit bootstrap was broken due to PR
bootstrap/
Hi Rainer,
On 4 Dec 2014, at 13:32, Rainer Orth wrote:
> FX writes:
>
>> 10-days ping
>> This restores bootstrap on a secondary target, target maintainer is OK with
>> it. I think I need build maintainers approval, so please review.
>
> While in my testing, 64-bit Mac OS X 10.10.1 (x86_64-appl
> While in my testing, 64-bit Mac OS X 10.10.1 (x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0)
> now bootstraps, but 32-bit (i386-apple-darwin14.0.0) does not:
Is it due to my patch, or pre-existing bootstrap failure?
How do you configure this 32-bit compiler? target/build/host/CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS/etc
FX
FX writes:
> 10-days ping
> This restores bootstrap on a secondary target, target maintainer is OK with
> it. I think I need build maintainers approval, so please review.
While in my testing, 64-bit Mac OS X 10.10.1 (x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0)
now bootstraps, but 32-bit (i386-apple-darwin14.0.0)
10-days ping
This restores bootstrap on a secondary target, target maintainer is OK with it.
I think I need build maintainers approval, so please review.
> when the freshly built g++ is used, we need to pass the appropriate -B
> options. As I understand it, the appropriate place for that is in
On 11/25/14 13:57, Phil Muldoon wrote:
On 25/11/14 20:37, Mike Stump wrote:
On Nov 23, 2014, at 4:06 PM, FX wrote:
One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to top-level
configure.ac
So, not sure who wants to review this. From the darwin perspective, Ok.
I mean from my l
On 25/11/14 20:37, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2014, at 4:06 PM, FX wrote:
>> One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to top-level
>> configure.ac
>
> So, not sure who wants to review this. From the darwin perspective, Ok.
I mean from my limited viewpoint it looks fine. As
On Nov 23, 2014, at 4:06 PM, FX wrote:
> One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to top-level
> configure.ac
So, not sure who wants to review this. From the darwin perspective, Ok.
tl;dr: One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to toplevel
configure.ac
---
I’m looked into the issue some more, and am comparing two builds of trunk
(exact same source), one configured with system compiler (clang) in PATH, the
other with GCC 4.9.2 in PATH.
At th
35 matches
Mail list logo
