On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 23:32, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Dongsheng Song wrote:
>>> The DATESTAMP change could also be in a post-commit hook (doing
>>> nothing if the date didn't change, of course). No idea whether
>>> this is technically possible of course.
>> Yes, the post-commi
On Jan 28, 2011, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Technically, Rietveld solves the ENOPATCH problem because the patch is
> *always* available at the URL produced in the patch message.
Hi, Diego,
I just got your e-mail with the patch. It didn't look that big, but it
will give me something useful to do in
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20110201 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20110201/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 18:57 +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > I'm trying (again) to work out how to build a GNAT cross compiler with
> > no runtime, but with the tools.
>
> As explained in the documentation, you need to first build a native GNAT
> compiler with the same sources before building a GN
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 01/02/2011 18:01, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
FWIW, your recan linker patch doesn't fix LTO 8, which is:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12277
>>> It wasn't supposed to, we've been through this before. It needs both the
>>
On 01/02/2011 18:01, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> FWIW, your recan linker patch doesn't fix LTO 8, which is:
>>>
>>> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12277
>> It wasn't supposed to, we've been through this before. It needs both the
>> link-order fix *and* the rescan-libs fix. The combined p
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 01/02/2011 17:15, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> On 01/02/2011 02:33, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Hi,
There are ~100 failures on each *-rtems* target
in the latest test runs when various lto
> I'm trying (again) to work out how to build a GNAT cross compiler with
> no runtime, but with the tools.
As explained in the documentation, you need to first build a native GNAT
compiler with the same sources before building a GNAT cross compiler.
Arno
On 01/02/2011 17:15, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 01/02/2011 02:33, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> There are ~100 failures on each *-rtems* target
>>> in the latest test runs when various lto related
>>> flags are on. The symbols in questions are i
Hi,
I'm trying (again) to work out how to build a GNAT cross compiler with
no runtime, but with the tools.
Firstly, I'd just like to ask, is this supposed to be possible?
If it is possible, why is it so hard/impossible and why will nobody from
AdaCore answer my questions regarding it?
I'm wanti
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 01/02/2011 02:33, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> There are ~100 failures on each *-rtems* target
>> in the latest test runs when various lto related
>> flags are on. The symbols in questions are in the
>> RTEMS libraries which are picked up
On 01/02/2011 14:30, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On 02/01/2011 04:54 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 01/02/2011 02:33, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>> Should LTO work with a target not using gold?
>>Yes, it should, but some work is needed at the binutils end. I am
>> testing
>> the attached two patches at the
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Dongsheng Song wrote:
>> The DATESTAMP change could also be in a post-commit hook (doing
>> nothing if the date didn't change, of course). No idea whether
>> this is technically possible of course.
> Yes, the post-commit hook can do this task.
> If we really want to do that, I
ok can do this task.
If we really want to do that, I can update the current post-commit
hook script [1].
*) Get DATESTAMP for the current branch in the repository, e.g.
$ svn cat svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk/gcc/DATESTAMP
20110201
$ svn cat svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-4_5-bra
On 02/01/2011 04:54 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
On 01/02/2011 02:33, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Hi,
There are ~100 failures on each *-rtems* target
in the latest test runs when various lto related
flags are on. The symbols in questions are in the
RTEMS libraries which are picked up via the
-B... argument.
On Jan 26, 2011, at 3:27 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Black Bit writes:
>
>> Could someone tell me if the work described in this paper
>> http://www.linuxsymposium.org/archives/GCC/Reprints-2006/namolaru-reprint.pdf
>> was completed and is part of gcc?Thanks
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, NightStrike wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Richard Guenther
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Dongsheng Song
>>> > wrote:
>
>> Could someone with the powers please modify my permissions to the above?
>
> I will do that if a gcc maintainer vouches for you.
For the record, this situation has now been resolved and I can edit
the bugs as requested.
Many thanks,
Tony
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 01/02/2011 02:33, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> There are ~100 failures on each *-rtems* target
>> in the latest test runs when various lto related
>> flags are on. The symbols in questions are in the
>> RTEMS libraries which are picked u
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, NightStrike wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Richard Guenther
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Dongsheng Song
>> > wrote:
>> >> It's very simple (only for trunk, although it maybe more usefu
On 01/02/2011 02:33, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There are ~100 failures on each *-rtems* target
> in the latest test runs when various lto related
> flags are on. The symbols in questions are in the
> RTEMS libraries which are picked up via the
> -B... argument. Other symbols from the same
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
