Fine.. as I said, what's a reasonable forum to discuss this on?
gnu.misc.discuss just doesn't cut it..
gnu-misc-discuss@ is the proper place, just ignore Terekhov.
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 07:35:39PM -0800, Brooks Moses wrote:
> Ed S. Peschko wrote:
> >And in any case, why should it be off-topic? I would think that
> >the possibility of your project being divided in two would be of
> >great concern to you guys, and that you'd have every single motivation to
Mike,
The problem is that the Geoff rejected the configure.in patch
that removes libgcj from noconfigdirs...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-09/msg00642.html
...as being too invasive for gcc 4.2. If you manually
apply that, it should build java fine with --disable-multilib
on Intel Darw
Ed S. Peschko wrote:
And in any case, why should it be off-topic? I would think that
the possibility of your project being divided in two would be of
great concern to you guys, and that you'd have every single motivation to
convey any sort of apprehension that you might have about such a split
Florian Pose wrote:
Hi all,
I recently started a microcontroller project based on the Renesas M16C
family. I successfully built the GNU toolchain (binutils-2.17,
gcc-4.1.1, newlib from CVS) and are now able to build executables for
the M32C-ELF target. Great! Now, two questions come up:
1) What
I was doing some research to answer some questions RMS had about bug
tracking, and I see some odd things: we have two bugs (24998 and 25438)
with Severity="blocker" and Priority="P5". This seems incoherent,
as do other uses of Severity="blocker". I had thought that this
designation was reserved
hey, got a new emailjust dropping by to say hi.
I got some videos online at http://one.revver.com/find/video/AltimitHacker .
u should check them out, they're pretty funny.
On Nov 15, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
But I still cannot figure out how to regenerate *reliably*
My take, aside from the top level, you enable maintainer mode and
type make with 2.59 in your path. If it fails to work, file a bug
report. For the top level, you should ha
"Ed S. Peschko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And in any case, why should it be off-topic? I would think that
> the possibility of your project being divided in two would be of
> great concern to you guys, and that you'd have every single motivation to
> convey any sort of apprehension that you
"Ed S. Peschko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And in any case, why should it be off-topic?
Regardless of how much it affects, us, it's off-topic *by definition*
in *this forum*. This isn't the right place to discuss such topics
because that's the way we want it to be.
> > Shouldn't the
> > libstdc++ configure script use the new GCC when checking things with
> > AC_TRY_COMPILE.
>
> Yes.
>
> -benjamin
It looks like this has something to do with using autoconf 2.59 at the
top-level of GCC. I am experimenting with updating the top-level GCC to
2.59 now that a
But all the references were updated, so why does it matter?
In Debian there is a patch for cross compilation that uses it.
Thanks
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 01:55:05PM -0800, Ed S. Peschko wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 02:14:00PM -0500, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > So, again, Is gcc planning on automatically moving to gpl version 3,
> > > staying
> > > at gpl version 2, or having a protracted discussi
> And in any case, why should it be off-topic? I would think that the
> possibility of your project being divided in two would be of great concern
> to you guys, and that you'd have every single motivation to convey any sort
> of apprehension that you might have about such a split to the group that
> > I'm sorry, but IMO this GPL change seems just a disaster waiting to
> > happen. Unless GPL3 is non-controversial (which it sounds like it is
> > not) it'll tear both your development team and your user community
> > in half, as well as probably get rid of a large part of your
> > corporate fund
> So I gather that the FSF has some sort of property-rights transfer
> document that developers sign in order to make their patches FSF property?
Correct.
> Also, I'm assuming that licenses are not able to be grand-fathered to old
> versions, so I'm assuming gcc's pre-gpl3 will always remain at g
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 02:14:00PM -0500, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > So, again, Is gcc planning on automatically moving to gpl version 3, staying
> > at gpl version 2, or having a protracted discussion? What happens if some
> > developers decide they want to stay at 2 and others deci
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 02:14:00PM -0500, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > So, again, Is gcc planning on automatically moving to gpl version 3,
> > staying
> > at gpl version 2, or having a protracted discussion? What happens if some
> > developers decide they want to stay at 2 and oth
| /raid/tecosim/it/devel/projects/develtools/src/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/libgcc2.c:1970:
| internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
| Please submit a full bug report,
| with preprocessed source if appropriate.
| See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
I am seeing this too. I tracked it back
"Hector Oron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When cross compiling GCC version 4.2 (Debian way). I'm missing,
> libstdc++-v3/config/linker-map.gnu
>
> Are those moved somewhere else? I can not find any changelog or
> something telling about it.
>
> There is a bug thread at Debian bug tracking
Le Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 03:00:21PM -0500, David Fang écrivait/wrote:
> > I am not sure to understand what is the *reliable* way to regenerate
> > GCC configure files from the real (human typed) master source files
> > (like Makefile.in, gcc/configure.ac, Makefile.tpl, etc...)
> >
> > I made some su
On 11/15/06, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/15/06, Sebastian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is a ddg in this patch if somebody wants the classic Allen&Kennedy
> way to look at the dependences:
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/OptimizationCourse?action=AttachFile&do=get&target
> Zdenek Dvorak writes:
Zdenek> thank you. What exactly does "non-algorithmic" mean in this context?
Please see the immediately previous announcement to the GCC
mailinglist of non-algorithmic maintainers.
David
On Nov 15, 2006, at 11:07 AM, Ed S. Peschko wrote:
My concern - and I'm sure I'm not the only one so concerned - is that
if gcc goes to version 3, linux distribution maintainers will not
choose
to go with the new version, or worse, some groups will choose to
remain
at gpl2 and others will go
Hello,
> I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has
> appointed Zdenek Dvorak and Daniel Berlin as non-algorithmic maintainers
> of the RTL and Tree loop optimizer infrastructure in GCC.
thank you. What exactly does "non-algorithmic" mean in this context?
Zdenek
>
Rainer Emrich wrote:
On trunk Revision: 118816
[snip]
-I/raid/tecosim/it/devel/projects/develtools/src/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/../libdecnumber
-I../libdecnumber -DL__gcc_bcmp -c
/raid/tecosim/it/devel/projects/develtools/src/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/libgcc2.c -o
libgcc/./__gcc_bcmp.o
/raid/tecosim/it/devel/project
> I am not sure to understand what is the *reliable* way to regenerate
> GCC configure files from the real (human typed) master source files
> (like Makefile.in, gcc/configure.ac, Makefile.tpl, etc...)
>
> I made some suggestions on the Wiki
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/AboutGCCConfiguration
>
>
>
Dear all,
I am not sure to understand what is the *reliable* way to regenerate
GCC configure files from the real (human typed) master source files
(like Makefile.in, gcc/configure.ac, Makefile.tpl, etc...)
I made some suggestions on the Wiki
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/AboutGCCConfiguration
Agai
>
> All,
>
> So, again, Is gcc planning on automatically moving to gpl version 3, staying
> at gpl version 2, or having a protracted discussion? What happens if some
> developers decide they want to stay at 2 and others decide they want to
> go with 3?
We (developers/SC) don't have control over
All,
I'm curious what is to happen with gcc when the gpl version 3 is done.
Will new versions of gcc be automatically changed to use the new license,
or will gcc stay at 2, will there be discussion about any such change?
My concern - and I'm sure I'm not the only one so concerned - is that
if gc
Hello,
When cross compiling GCC version 4.2 (Debian way). I'm missing,
libstdc++-v3/config/linker-map.gnu
Are those moved somewhere else? I can not find any changelog or
something telling about it.
There is a bug thread at Debian bug tracking system[1].
Should it be filed a bug against GCC-4
I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has
appointed Zdenek Dvorak and Daniel Berlin as non-algorithmic maintainers
of the RTL and Tree loop optimizer infrastructure in GCC.
Please join me in congratulating Zdenek and Daniel on their new
role. Zdenek and Daniel,
GCC has increased in size, scope, and complexity, but the number of
maintainers has not scaled commensurately. While there is a need for more
reviewers, there also is a concern of too many maintainers stepping on one
another and GCC development becoming more chaotic.
After a lot of brain-storming
hi ,
i need ahelp ; plz tell me how i can get entry point whom from i can
change graph coloring register allocation technique to linear scan ; what r
modules & will affect ; plz send me mail ;
manish mohan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Florian Pose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) What is the correct way to set the reset vector?
Wrong mailing list. This mailing list is for development of the gcc
compiler itself.
You could try the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list, but I think
you'll have better luck if you can find some forum fo
albino aiello wrote on 11/15/06 10:14:
Thanks, but i want to use the .cfg file to construct directly a
tree_cfg in C language using the TREE SSA libraries of gcc.
There is no such thing as a tree ssa library. If you are adding a pass
to GCC, then you already have the CFG at your disposal. I
Thanks,
but i want to use the .cfg file to construct directly a tree_cfg in C
language using the TREE SSA libraries of gcc. The doc-page is the follow
http://people.redhat.com/dnovillo/pub/tree-ssa/doc/html/files.html. I'm
not understand how to use this libraries to contstruct a tree-cfg to
m
Hi,
I just posted on the wiki (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SwingModuloScheduling) a
list of items to improve the GCC modulo scheduler (SMS). We've been looking
into this on and off in the past year, while trying to tune it for ppc970
and then for the Cell. With relatively small tweaks, SMS is startin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/15/06 06:06:
Hi all,
i must use cfg library to build and manipulate a control flow graph. I have
read more but i have not found an answer to my question: It is possible to
build a cfg structure directly from a file .cfg ?? How i can building a cfg
from a file??
Th
François-Xavier Coudert wrote:
I suggest that you test the following patch and report back to us:
I got the patch wrong (it's not a real printf function we have there):
Index: libgfortran/runtime/error.c
===
--- libgfortran/runt
Hi all,
I recently started a microcontroller project based on the Renesas M16C
family. I successfully built the GNU toolchain (binutils-2.17,
gcc-4.1.1, newlib from CVS) and are now able to build executables for
the M32C-ELF target. Great! Now, two questions come up:
1) What is the correct way to
Hi all,
i must use cfg library to build and manipulate a control flow graph. I have
read more but i have not found an answer to my question: It is possible to
build a cfg structure directly from a file .cfg ?? How i can building a cfg
from a file??
Thanks to all,
lastnote
On trunk Revision: 118816
/SCRATCH/gcc-build/HP-UX/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/gcc-4.3.0/gcc-4.3.0/./gcc/xgcc
-B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/HP-UX/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/gcc-4.3.0/gcc-4.3.0/./gcc/
-B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/HP-UX/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/install/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/bin/
-B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/HP-UX/hppa2.0
On 11/15/06, Sebastian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is a ddg in this patch if somebody wants the classic Allen&Kennedy
way to look at the dependences:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/OptimizationCourse?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=loop-distribution-patch-against-gcc-4.1.0-release.patch
Any
On 08 Nov 2006 08:07:50 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 2006-11-07 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > * gimplify.c (fold_indirect_ref_rhs): Use
> > STRIP_USELESS_TYPE_CONVERSION rather than STRIP_NOPS.
45 matches
Mail list logo
