Hi, On 2018-08-25 13:08:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2018-08-16 11:41:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > >>> While I'd personally have no problem kicking gcc 3.4 to the curb, I'm > >>> still confused what causes this error mode. Kinda looks like > >>> out-of-sync headers with gcc or something. > > >> Yeah, this is *absolutely* unsurprising for a non-native gcc installation > >> on an old platform. > > > Sure, but that still requires the headers to behave differently between > > C89 and C99 mode, as this worked before. But it turns out there's two > > different math.h implementation headers, depending on c99 being enabled > > (math_c99.h being the troublesome). If I understand correctly the > > problem is more that the system library headers are *newer* (and assume > > a sun studio emulating/copying quite a bit of gcc) than the gcc that's > > being used, and therefore gcc fails. > > I have some more info on this issue, based on having successfully > updated "gaur" using gcc 3.4.6 (which I picked because it was the last > of the 3.x release series). It seems very unlikely that there's much > difference between 3.4.3 and 3.4.6 as far as external features go. > What I find in the 3.4.6 documentation is > > -- Built-in Function: double __builtin_inf (void) > Similar to `__builtin_huge_val', except a warning is generated if > the target floating-point format does not support infinities. > This function is suitable for implementing the ISO C99 macro > `INFINITY'. > > Note that the function is called "__builtin_inf", whereas what we see > protosciurus choking on is "__builtin_infinity". So I don't think this > is a version skew issue at all. I think that the system headers are > written for the Solaris cc, and its name for the equivalent function is > __builtin_infinity, whereas what gcc wants is __builtin_inf. Likewise, > the failures we see for __builtin_isinf and __builtin_isnan are because > Solaris cc provides those but gcc does not. > > If we wanted to keep protosciurus going without a compiler update, my > thought would be to modify gcc's copy of math_c99.h to correct the > function name underlying INFINITY, and change the definitions of isinf() > and isnan() back to whatever was being used pre-C99. > > It's possible that newer gcc releases have been tweaked so that they > make appropriate corrections in this header file automatically, but > that's not a sure thing.
I've pinged Dave about this, and he said: On 2018-09-26 17:04:29 -0400, Dave Page wrote: > Unfortunately, i think that whole machine is basically EOL now. It's > already skipping OpenSSL for some builds, as being stuck on a very old > version of the buildfarm client, as some of the modules used in newer > versions just won't compile or work. I don't have any support contract, or > access to newer versions of SunStudio, and the guys that used to package > GCC for Solaris now charge to download their packages. > > I could potentially build my own version of GCC, but I question whether > it's really worth it, given the other problems. He's now disabled building master on protosciurus and casteroides. We still have damselfly and rover_firefly so I don't feel too bad about that. I've pinged their owners to ask whether they could set up a sun studio (or however that's called in their solaris descendants) version. Greetings, Andres Freund
