vivek sukumaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are there any ready to use gcc rpms for,
host:x-86,redhat9.0
target:alpha
The right mailing list to ask is the one at
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/crossgcc/
When you do post there, be sure to mention what OS
the target will be running.
If the target i
Amit Thakar wrote:
Following is the error i'am getting while compiling gcc-3.3.1.I am using
headers of my system.How do i get rid of this.
In file included from tconfig.h:23,
from ../../../gcc-3.3.1/gcc/libgcc2.c:36:
../../../gcc-3.3.1/gcc/config/i386/linux.h:232:20: signal.h: No
Jim Wilson wrote:
Moving trees around has worked for a long time, but it required
manually setting the GCC_EXEC_PREFIX environment variable.
Cygnus got this working reliably sometime in the early '90s I think.
In gcc-3.0 and later, there is code (make_relative_prefix) that
computes and sets G
Clemens Koller wrote:
+ ../../../exports/bin/mkfontscale /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1
make[4]: *** [install] Error 132
Can you try to produce a standalone test case
that doesn't require building all of X?
e.g. can you save the preprocessor output from the mkfontscale
compiler run, compile that on
Judging by http://gcc.gnu.org/PR20815, I get the feeling
not many people are using the -fprofile-generate
and -fprofile-use options yet, at least not with
C++, since it appears that namespaces make those options
fall over... It'd be nice to get this fixed for gcc-4.0
(assuming it's a real bug and
"Rupert Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a problem with getting rid of -fno-unit-at-a-time. Sometimes
we compile huge Java programs; however, keeping all the method bodies
consumes vast amouts of memory.
AFAICT, MSVC solves this by generating some of the code when it reaches some
memory li
Vishal Kothari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How can I use GCC for cross compilation?
I want to build an application for the EPOC platform. It is for a
Psion 5MX device which has an 32-bit RISC-based ARM 710 processor.
The application is in C. Is it possible to build the application using
GCC for that
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 10:02:06AM -0700, Daniel Kegel wrote:
BTW, I hope -fno-unit-at-a-time doesn't go away until at least gcc-4.1.1
or so... I still lean on that crutch.
A user! Can you explain why?
Hmm. I just looked, and it seems the only thing I still
use it f
Andi Kleen wrote:
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 10:02:06AM -0700, Daniel Kegel wrote:
BTW, I hope -fno-unit-at-a-time doesn't go away until at least gcc-4.1.1
or so... I still lean on that crutch.
A user! Can you explain why?
The x86-64 2.4 l
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
BTW, I hope -fno-unit-at-a-time doesn't go away until at least gcc-4.1.1
or so... I still lean on that crutch.
A user! Can you explain why?
The x86-64 2.4 linux kernel uses it too, because some code relies on
the ordering between asm and several functions.
Other Linux por
"Steven J. Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a working MIPS cross toolchain with:
binutils-2.15
gcc-3.4.2
glibc-2.3.4
linux-2.6.12
and then decided to work with gcc-4.1.0 out of the cvs head. I am now
getting build problems with glibc-2.3.4 with the first major snafu
being:
../sys
The alternative of course is to do only crossbuilds. Is it reasonable
to say that, for platforms where a bootstrap is no longer feasible, a
successful crossbuild is an acceptable test procedure to use instead?
Sure, and get flamed and trounced by Uli on glibc when you talk
about problems with cros
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's wrong with this ? It is ok in gcc 3 not not ok with gcc4:
#define SERVICE_TYPE(type, val, state) SERVICE_##type = val,
typedef enum service_e {
SERVICE_TYPE(NONE, 0, false)
SERVICE_TYPE(FTP,1, true)
SERVICE_TYPE_MAX
} service_type_t;
Compi
E. Weddington wrote:
The suggestion to look at Dan Kegel's crosstool is a good one,
>> but crosstool only handles cross compilers to linux, and hence isn't relevant here.
There have been patches to it for building on Cygwin,
plus the occasional success story on Cygwin, IIRC.
(Perhaps Dan can comm
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2005 at 08:41:58AM -0700, Gary Funck wrote:
> Yes, with recent versions of gcc you can move the entire tree around
> and the gcc driver will still be able to find the various internal
> executables and header files. [...]
Ian, thanks.
Which versions qualify
Kai Rottu wrote:
On windows, it is possible to build a binary using a compiler on Windows XP
that can then run on older versions of windows simply by not using any features
specific to the newest versions of windows XP (or by using LoadLibrary and
GetProcAddress to see if those features are avai
Any news on when profile-based inlining will be merged?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-05/msg00224.html and
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CFG%20Transparent%20Inlining,%20Profile-Guided%20Inlining
have all the official news, but they just say it's not in yet.
I have an app that might benefit from this
I recently worked with a UCLA student to boil down
a reported openssl performance regression with gcc-4.0
to a small standalone case (see http://gcc.gnu.org/PR19923).
We have a bit more followup to do there, but it seems
to have been a good use of an student's time.
So, I'm looking around for oth
I don't know about everybody else, but the
subject lines are starting to run together for me :-)
Can somebody suggest a place to start looking for
why the libgcc_s.so built by crosstool's gcc-3.4 can't handle
exceptions from apps built by fc3's gcc-3.4?
The C++ program
#include
void foo() throw (int) {
std::cout << "In foo()" << std::endl;
throw 1;
}
int main() {
try {
foo();
} catc
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Daniel Kegel wrote:
Can somebody suggest a place to start looking for
why the libgcc_s.so built by crosstool's gcc-3.4 can't handle
exceptions from apps built by fc3's gcc-3.4?
Try diffing the output of configure from building one and the other
Scott wrote:
> Given the recent problems with the 4.0.0 release and major packages like
> KDE and the kernel, has anyone considered testing releases by completely
> compiling a Linux system?
It's kind of hard to do for a new major release,
since the apps and kernel might not be ported yet,
but 4.
Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
Mark Mitchell wrote:
2. Jakub Jelinek reports that we're miscompiling GLIBC.
[I think this is http://gcc.gnu.org/PR22043 ]
The latter problem seems to me to be as severe as the KDE bug that was
the impetus for this release. ...
Agreed. I've had mixed reports from
Mike Hearn wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 15:47:31 +0200, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
NTPL vers. non NTPL signal handling differences. The FC3 compiler contains
some "backward compatibility" shims at quite a few places, which are
allowing old binaries to execute. However stuff compiled with the FC3
versi
R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Kegel wrote:
(Interestingly, the fixes in glibc-cvs
seem to have been made in such a way that
the new glibc won't be compilable by older
versions of gcc, like gcc-3.4.4.
I guess the thinking is that everyone should be using the latest gcc?)
Hmm, do you
For those who are attending the gcc summit for the first time,
here's a page with a bit more detail about how to
get from the airport to the hotel, etc.
http://kegel.com/gcc/summit2005.html
It's pretty easy, but I remember figuring it out
the first time was harder, so I figured a page
of notes
I get this error compiling linux-2.6.11.3 with gcc-4.1-20050702 on many targets:
drivers/char/random.c: In function 'extract_entropy':
drivers/char/random.c:634: sorry, unimplemented: inlining failed in call to
'add_entropy_words': function not considered for inlining
drivers/char/random.c:1325:
Jan Hubicka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I get this error compiling linux-2.6.11.3 with gcc-4.1-20050702 on many
targets:
drivers/char/random.c:1813: internal compiler error: in cgraph_early_inlining,
at ipa-inline.c:990
I don't have the preprocessed source handy, but I can provide it if
this h
Joe Buck wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 12:49:52PM -0700, Doug Evans wrote:
Building a cross compiler from scratch "just works" (as in all one
has to do is "configure, make all install") if all of binutils, gcc,
newlib, libgloss, libstdc++, etc. are siblings.
[At least this use to "just work".]
"Mark Cuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm trying to get myself a group of libraries that I can distribute
> with my program so that they'll run on any distro.
> I run into problems all the time when different distros have different
versions of system libraries like libstdc++, libgcc, libc, etc
I ran into a template-y ICE building a real app with gcc-4.0.1:
my-callback-specializations.h: At global scope:
my-callback-specializations.h: In instantiation of
'_MemberResultCallback_0_1':
my-flow.cc:894: instantiated from here
my-callback-specializations.h:2064: internal compiler error: in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, I stand corrected. As a practical implementation we can have a
mechanism as push/pop timevar, that would monitor the time and space
of an algorithm and that can cancel the computation for failing on a
safe approximation. As a first concretization, I was thinking t
Andrew wrote:
>> No threads in gcc, please.
>
> Why? If this is only for double checking, why not?
Sorry, I missed that boehm-gc already uses threads.
Ignore me, I'm just a cranky old-school programmer...
but still, if there's a way to implement the checker
without using threads, that would sur
Ivan Novick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you recommend a solution for compiling Windows DLLs on any variation of
UNIX?
You want mingw, I think. The doc for this is somewhat scanty.
See e.g.
http://www.mingw.org/mingwfaq.shtml#faq-cross
http://wiki.wxwidgets.org/wiki.pl?Install_The_Mingw_Cro
Jonathan Day wrote:
Crosstool, for example, only supports 32-bit MIPS -
and even then the build matrix is a pretty shade of
red for the most part.
[ The build matrix: http://kegel.com/crosstool/current/buildlogs/ ]
There are quite a few combinations that build for 32-bit mips with crosstool,
35 matches
Mail list logo
