On Thu, 17 Jun 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Matthias Klose wrote: > > > - multiarch shouldn't be disabled > > - the selection which multilibs to build should be done by patching > > gcc/config/m68k/* > > Hrm. He didn’t really answer my questions about the c++ symbols > problem, but this would help us further along at least. > > Does anyone have an idea about the symbols thing? > • LP bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/514579 > • build log: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/44949657/gcc44m68k.log.gz > (338K gzip’d, look at the end) > • Thread: http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2010/04/msg00025.html > > What multiarch targets do we want to build?
Hopefully, all those targets available to the etch-m68k compilers. Not sure whether fidoa was one of those? This thread is interesting: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg01069.html Maybe email the CodeSourcery people who implemented fido support, and ask them what to do about libgfortran? > > I can see use for m68040, dunno about m68060, don’t think mcpu32 > or mfidoa. What about Coldfire – is that a gcc-4.5 thing (I’m > strictly concentrating on gcc-4{3,4} with libc-2.7 at the moment)? > > Does anyone have an idea about the c++ symbols thing? Not just C++ apparently... $ grep symbols.doesn.t gcc44m68k.log dpkg-gensymbols: warning: debian/libgcc2/DEBIAN/symbols doesn't match completely debian/libgcc2.symbols.m68k dpkg-gensymbols: warning: debian/libobjc2/DEBIAN/symbols doesn't match completely debian/libobjc2.symbols dpkg-gensymbols: warning: debian/libstdc++6/DEBIAN/symbols doesn't match completely debian/libstdc++6.symbols.m68k In your discussion with Matthias, I see that !defined(_GLIBCXX_HAVE_TLS) is given as the cause. As it happens, I've recently opened a couple of bug reports about backporting TLS [1, 2]. You'll see that I've requested that the patch "m68k-allow-gnu99.diff" be dropped from both 4.4 and 4.5. I hope this does not harm your work on gcc? 4.3 at least, won't be affected. Regards, Finn [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=586005 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=586060 > > bye, > //mirabilos >
