[Bug other/12782] ffi.h #defines ffi_type_[us]long wrong on 32bit arches
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12782 green at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2003-10-27 00:58:14 |2003-10-31 06:14:56 date|| --- Additional Comments From green at redhat dot com 2003-10-31 06:14 --- Yes, this is wrong. We should use tests to define ffi_type_[us]long like the other types descriptors above it. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Bug#218459: gcc: duplicate declaration of va_list
Package: gcc Version: 2:2.95.4-14 Severity: minor When compiling libzorpll on alpha, I got the following warning. I don't know if it is a libc or gcc bug, I file it against gcc, because libc uses #ifdef __USE_XOPEN # ifdef __GNUC__ # ifndef _VA_LIST_DEFINED libc version: ii libc6.1-dev2.2.5-11.5 and the warning: In file included from /usr/include/resolv.h:62, from main.c:49: /usr/include/stdio.h:70: warning: redefinition of `va_list' /usr/lib/gcc-lib/alpha-linux/2.95.4/include/va-alpha.h:36: warning: `va_list' previously declared here -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: alpha Kernel: Linux faure 2.2.17 #1 Thu Sep 28 21:31:08 EST 2000 alpha Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages gcc depends on: ii cpp2:2.95.4-14 The GNU C preprocessor. ii cpp-2.95 1:2.95.4-11woody1 The GNU C preprocessor. ii gcc-2.95 1:2.95.4-11woody1 The GNU C compiler.
Bug#218459: gcc: duplicate declaration of va_list
"Magossa'nyi A'rpa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > When compiling libzorpll on alpha, I got the following > warning. > > In file included from /usr/include/resolv.h:62, > from main.c:49: > /usr/include/stdio.h:70: warning: redefinition of `va_list' > /usr/lib/gcc-lib/alpha-linux/2.95.4/include/va-alpha.h:36: warning: > `va_list' previously declared here This is fixed in 3.x; I'm not sure whether it is worth leaving this bug report open, since most likely nobody is going to bother fixing it... -- Falk
Bug#171778: Undefined symbols libc.so.6
Hi, While browsing internet I got reference to Bug#171778. I am getting similar kind of errors, while doing following: $ arm-linux-gcc sample.c I get lots of "Undefined references" as shown below: # c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]' c:\MinGW\msys\home\cinstall_armlinux\bin\..\lib\gcc-lib\arm-linux\3.2.2\..\. .\..\..\arm-linux\lib\libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## I am not able to find out, what is the resolution of this bug. Kindly provide feedbacks/suggestion. Thanks, Manoj
[Bug target/12371] [3.4 regression] [m68k-linux] bootstrap error in make compare
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12371 --- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2003-10-31 21:21 --- These are my m68k patches from the relevant time frame: 2003-09-03 Bernardo Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * config.gcc (m68k-*-linux*): Remove definition of LINUX_DEFAULT_ELF. * config/i370/linux.h (LINUX_DEFAULT_ELF): Remove unconditional definition and code blocks compiled when not defined. * config/i386/linux.h (LINUX_DEFAULT_ELF): Likewise. * config/i386/linux64.h (LINUX_DEFAULT_ELF): Likewise. * config/sparc/linux.h: (LINUX_DEFAULT_ELF): Likewise. * config/sparc/linux64.h: (LINUX_DEFAULT_ELF): Likewise. 2003-09-04 Bernardo Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * config/m68k/m68k.c (m68k_coff_asm_named_section): Restore deleted function. * config/m68k/coff.h (M68K_TARGET_COFF): Add flag used to enable coff-only code in m68k.c. I've re-read both patches and they seem rather safe, but... is it possible that the objects produced during stage3 aren't really ELF files? There are no other m68k-related patches in the same period. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Results for 3.4 20031030 (experimental) testsuite on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu
LAST_UPDATED: Thu Oct 30 22:06:32 UTC 2003 Native configuration is hppa-unknown-linux-gnu === g++ tests === Running target unix XPASS: g++.dg/ext/lvalue1.C not an lvalue (test for errors, line 7) FAIL: g++.dg/ext/pretty1.C scan-assembler top level FAIL: g++.dg/ext/pretty2.C (test for excess errors) WARNING: g++.dg/ext/pretty2.C compilation failed to produce executable XPASS: g++.dg/other/packed1.C execution test FAIL: g++.dg/parse/crash10.C (test for errors, line 14) XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wunused-2.C (test for warnings, line 5) FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.law/profile1.C execution test WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.mike/p10769a.C compilation failed to produce executable WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.other/enum5.C compilation failed to produce executable XPASS: g++.old-deja/g++.other/init5.C execution test WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.pt/friend44.C compilation failed to produce executable FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.pt/vaarg3.C (test for excess errors) === g++ Summary === # of expected passes9005 # of unexpected failures5 # of unexpected successes 4 # of expected failures 59 # of unsupported tests 62 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/testsuite/../g++ version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === g77 tests === Running target unix === g77 Summary === # of expected passes1752 # of expected failures 1 # of untested testcases 1 # of unsupported tests 6 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/testsuite/../g77 version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === gcc tests === Running target unix WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/950512-1.c (test for excess errors) WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/950512-1.c (test for excess errors) WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/950512-1.c (test for excess errors) WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/950512-1.c (test for excess errors) WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/950512-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030307-1.c execution, -O2 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030307-1.c execution, -Os UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O0 UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O1 UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O2 UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O3 -g UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -Os FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-2.c scan-assembler xyzzy FAIL: gcc.dg/20021014-1.c execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/const-elim-1.c scan-assembler-not L\\\$?C[^A-Z] FAIL: gcc.dg/nest.c execution test === gcc Summary === # of expected passes24181 # of unexpected failures26 # of expected failures 79 # of unresolved testcases 6 # of untested testcases 7 # of unsupported tests 281 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === objc tests === Running target unix === objc Summary === # of expected passes1337 # of unsupported tests 7 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === treelang tests === Running target unix WARNING: /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/src/gcc/testsuite/treelang/a01gcc.out01 doesn't exist WARNING: /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/src/gcc/testsuite/treelang/a01gcc.out01err doesn't exist WARNING: /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/src/gcc/testsuite/treelang/a01gcco01runpgmerr doesn't exist UNRESOLVED: gcc 01 01 fail code=11. gcc 01 01 diff stdout failed rc=0 === treelang Summary === # of unresolved testcases 1 === libstdc++-v3 check-abi Summary === # of added symbols: 201 # of missing symbols:220 # of incompatible symbols: 227 using: /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030
Results for 3.4 20031030 (experimental) testsuite on i486-pc-linux-gnu
LAST_UPDATED: Thu Oct 30 22:06:32 UTC 2003 === ACATS tests === FAIL: c34005a FAIL: c34005d FAIL: c34005g FAIL: c34005j FAIL: cc3601a FAIL: cxb3010 FAIL: cxb3014 FAIL: cxb3015 === ACATS Summary === # of expected passes 2314 # of unexpected failures 8 Native configuration is i486-pc-linux-gnu === g++ tests === Running target unix XPASS: g++.dg/ext/lvalue1.C not an lvalue (test for errors, line 7) FAIL: g++.dg/ext/pretty1.C scan-assembler top level FAIL: g++.dg/ext/pretty2.C (test for excess errors) WARNING: g++.dg/ext/pretty2.C compilation failed to produce executable FAIL: g++.dg/parse/crash10.C (test for errors, line 14) XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wunused-2.C (test for warnings, line 5) WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.mike/p10769a.C compilation failed to produce executable WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.other/enum5.C compilation failed to produce executable XPASS: g++.old-deja/g++.other/init5.C execution test WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.pt/friend44.C compilation failed to produce executable FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.pt/vaarg3.C (test for excess errors) === g++ Summary === # of expected passes9090 # of unexpected failures4 # of unexpected successes 3 # of expected failures 59 # of unsupported tests 29 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/testsuite/../g++ version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === g77 tests === Running target unix === g77 Summary === # of expected passes1752 # of expected failures 1 # of untested testcases 1 # of unsupported tests 6 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/testsuite/../g77 version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === gcc tests === Running target unix FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/930621-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/930621-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/930621-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/930621-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c execution, -O0 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c execution, -O1 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c execution, -O2 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c execution, -O3 -g FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c execution, -Os UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O0 UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O1 UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O2 UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -O3 -g UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/wchar_t-1.c execution, -Os FAIL: gcc.dg/const-elim-1.c scan-assembler-not L\\\$?C[^A-Z] FAIL: gcc.dg/old-style-asm-1.c (test for excess errors) ERROR: gcc.dg/old-style-asm-1.c: error executing dg-final: couldn't open "old-style-asm-1.s": no such file or directory UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/old-style-asm-1.c: error executing dg-final: couldn't open "old-style-asm-1.s": no such file or directory === gcc Summary === # of expected passes24551 # of unexpected failures12 # of expected failures 81 # of unresolved testcases 7 # of untested testcases 7 # of unsupported tests 156 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === objc tests === Running target unix === objc Summary === # of expected passes1337 # of unsupported tests 7 /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.4 20031030 (experimental) === treelang tests === Running target unix === treelang Summary === # of expected passes1 === libffi tests === Running target unix FAIL: libffi.call/cls_1_1byte.c execution test FAIL: libffi.call/cls_2byte.c execution test FAIL: libffi.call/cls_3_1byte.c execution test FAIL: libffi.call/cls_5byte.c execution test FAIL: libffi.call/cls_6byte.c execution test FAIL: libffi.call/pyobjc-tc.c execution test === libffi Summary === # of expected passes114 # of unexpected failures6 # of unsupported tests 2 === libjava tests === Running target unix FAIL: SyncGlobal -O3 execution - bytecode->native test === libjava Summary === # of expected passes3203 # of unexpected failures1 # of expected failures 10 # of untested testcases 9 === libstdc++-v3 check-abi Summary === # of added symbols: 201 # of missing symbols:220 # of incompatible symbols: 227 using: /build/packages/gcc/snap/gcc-snapshot-20031030/src/libstdc++-v3/config/abi/i
[Bug other/12315] [3.4 Regression] ICE using -p with functions returning structs
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12315 --- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-11-01 00:48 --- Subject: Bug 12315 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-11-01 00:48:51 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog final.c Log message: PR 12315 * final.c (profile_function): Allow for NULL svrtx. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.1630&r2=2.1631 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/final.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.293&r2=1.294 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug other/12315] [3.4 Regression] ICE using -p with functions returning structs
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12315 amodra at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From amodra at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-11-01 01:12 --- fixed --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug c++/12421] [3.4 regression] ICE with -pg
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12421 Bug 12421 depends on bug 12315, which changed state. Bug 12315 Summary: [3.4 Regression] ICE using -p with functions returning structs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12315 What|Old Value |New Value Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
FWD: gcc in debian/unstable
FYI -randolph - Forwarded message from David Mosberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - From: David Mosberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:20:36 -0800 To: debian-ia64@lists.debian.org Subject: gcc in debian/unstable Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1242 While looking for something else, I noticed that the GCC in Debian/unstable is configured with --enable-debug: $ gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/ia64-linux/3.3.2/specs Configured with: ../src/configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,pascal,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.3 --enable-shared --with-system-zlib --enable-nls --without-included-gettext --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-debug --enable-java-gc=boehm --enable-java-awt=xlib --enable-objc-gc ia64-linux Thread model: posix gcc version 3.3.2 20031005 (Debian prerelease) Is this intentional? A while back, I measured this with gcc-pre3.4 and with that compiler, the overhead of --enable-debug was >30%. Unless there are good reasons for it, my recommendation would be to build with --disable-debug, as that would likely speed up compile-times a lot. --david -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message -
Re: FWD: gcc in debian/unstable
Are you sure he doesn't mean --enable-checking? --enable-debug should not affect compile time significantly. On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 08:44:49PM -0800, Randolph Chung wrote: > FYI -randolph > > - Forwarded message from David Mosberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > From: David Mosberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:20:36 -0800 > To: debian-ia64@lists.debian.org > Subject: gcc in debian/unstable > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1242 > > While looking for something else, I noticed that the GCC in > Debian/unstable is configured with --enable-debug: > > $ gcc -v > Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/ia64-linux/3.3.2/specs > Configured with: ../src/configure -v > --enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,pascal,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr > --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info > --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.3 --enable-shared > --with-system-zlib --enable-nls --without-included-gettext > --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-debug > --enable-java-gc=boehm --enable-java-awt=xlib --enable-objc-gc ia64-linux > Thread model: posix > gcc version 3.3.2 20031005 (Debian prerelease) > > Is this intentional? A while back, I measured this with gcc-pre3.4 > and with that compiler, the overhead of --enable-debug was >30%. > Unless there are good reasons for it, my recommendation would be to > build with --disable-debug, as that would likely speed up > compile-times a lot. > > --david > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - End forwarded message - > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Re: FWD: gcc in debian/unstable
In reference to a message from Daniel Jacobowitz, dated Oct 31: > Are you sure he doesn't mean --enable-checking? --enable-debug should > not affect compile time significantly. yup, David confirmed he meant enable-checking. thanks for the quick reply. randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/
