https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #128 from Peter Bisroev <peter.bisroev at groundlabs dot com> ---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #125)
> On 2020-01-25 7:59 p.m., peter.bisroev at groundlabs dot com wrote:
> > Please let me know what you would like me to try next.
> Let's look at testsuite log in <build>/gcc/testsuite/gcc. This should show
> problem with weak.
> For example,
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/weak/weak-1.c
>
> Also look at a hidden failure to see what's wrong with .hidden.
>
> Dave
At this point I have noticed that the objdump could not be executed while
running tests. Adding binutils-2.32 that I have compiled earlier to the PATH
allowed all the weak tests to pass. I obviously made some mistake running
$ make check-c check-c++
initially, so I just kicked of another test run to see what the results will be
using this command
$ gmake -j8 check-c check-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS="-v"
Will update you once I get the results.
In the meantime, I wanted to ask you. Is it OK for me to add to the PATH
directory containing binutils-2.32 compiled with aCC prior to bootstrapping GCC
4.7.4? For bootstrapping I have provided actual utilities to configure script
directly with a flag such as `--with-as`. Currently this directory contains:
addr2line
ar
as
c++filt
elfedit
gprof
nm
objcopy
objdump
ranlib
readelf
size
strings
strip
As expected ld is missing from the above as on HPUX we need to use HP's linker.
But what about the rest of the binaries? Will using them over comparable HP
ones cause any issues? I am asking as I have had issues with using binutils
provided binaries over system based ones when bootstrapping gcc on AIX.
The other question I wanted to ask, is my make check command above acceptable
or is there a better way to run these tests and get more information?
Thank you!
--peter
