u.org
and verified them via the website there.
Thanks for the report, Dennis!
Gerald
2009-04-06 Gerald Pfeifer
* doc/install.texi (Specific): Fix two cross-references to MinGW.
Index: doc/install.texi
===
---
On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> There is currently no way to get from the front page to the
> gcc-4.4/changes.html page, should there be a "(changes)" link on the
> front page until a release is added to the gcc-4.4/index.html page?
I think that would be appropriate, yes. Are you g
On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, Andreas Tobler wrote:
>>> I've cc'ed others who have access to the platforms in question based on
>>> GCC test results. Please help if you can.
>>
>> - powerpc-apple-darwin9.6.0 gcc-4.5.0 gmp-4.2.2 mpfr-2.3.1 ok.
>> - sparc-sun-solaris2.10 gcc-4.4 gmp-4.2.2 mpfr-2.3.1 ok
>> -
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Joe Buck wrote:
> When there is traffic, the SC gets to spend time arguing with RMS. Oh, joy.
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Recently I've been thinking: let's have a periodic election for a
> developer ombudsman member on the SC, someone who could summarize
> (to t
//gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.4/criteria.html)?
> We have only variants of Linux as OS for now, so these
> match but not the rest.
>
> For i386-unknown-freebsd I could set up one, it seems that Gerald
> Pfeifer has a tester already spamming gcc-testresult :).
sadly, nobody has sent me his cr
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> 2009-04-04 Gerald Pfeifer
>>
>> * update_web_docs_svn: Run this script under plain /bin/sh
>> as opposed to /bin/sh -x.
> I think this is OK. -x was probably more useful before the script used
> set -e
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009, Damian Pietras wrote:
> There is probably an outdated information on GnuPG keys at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html
Thanks for the report, Damian. Jakub just updated the website, and
you should now find the key having signed the GCC 4.4.0 release there.
Gerald
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Should I undo this change to the front page, now that the 'changes'
> link is next to the 4.4.0 release on gcc-4.4/index.html ?
I have to admit I don't feel strongly either way. What do you think?
Gerald
Hi Jack,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Jack Howarth wrote:
>A couple changes in gcc 4.4.0 were omitted for
> the darwin target. The gcc 4.4.0 release now supports
> a full multilib build on the x86_64-apple-darwin9 and
> x86_64-apple-darwin10 targets. The gfortran compiler
> is now capable of generatin
As follows:
> cc1: warnings being treated as errors
> /usr/test/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c: In function 'add_sym':
> /usr/test/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c:306: error: enum conversion in
> assignment is invalid in C++
> gmake[3]: *** [fortran/intrinsic.o] Error 1
> gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/u
On i386-unknown-freebsd7.1 we see the following tests fail:
FAIL: libgomp.fortran/condinc2.f -O (test for excess errors)
WARNING: libgomp.fortran/condinc2.f -O compilation failed to produce
executable
FAIL: libgomp.fortran/condinc4.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
WARNING: libgomp.fo
As everyone here surely has seen, DJ Delorie has been submitting a
new port for the Toshiba Media Processor (mep-elf) and done a number
of adjustments based on feedback already.
Pending initial (technical) approval the steering committee welcomes
this new port and is happy to appoint DJ as maintai
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> How do you folks have several GCC installed at the same prefix?
Yes, I have been doing this for the FreeBSD ports for years, and what
I am using there is the following
--program-suffix=${SUFFIX} \
--libdir=${TARGLIB} \
--libexecd
It is my pleasure to announce that the steering committee is
appointing Anthony Green as maintainer of the new Moxie port
that has been approved from a technical perspective as well.
Please adjust the MAINTAINERS file accordingly, Anthony, and
happy hacking! And of course, go ahead and commit the
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Nice. Could you upload them to http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/PerformanceTesting?
How about gcc/contrib?
Gerald
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009, H.J. Lu wrote:
> I think it is a bad idea to include it in -Wall. You fixed 3 warnings in
> gcc and I fixed 1 in binutils. If you have thousands of packages in C,
> -Wall may generate hundreds of warnings. It will make gcc 4.5.0 unusable
> to those people.
A warning is a wa
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Michael Meissner wrote:
> All of my comments about the internals of the mep would be things to do
> if you desired, but as port maintainer, I don't see that we have to
> apply standards set for the rest of the compiler (if we did, probably
> half of the ports would be rejected
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#utf8_identifiers
How is a question that's been asked once a FAQ? :-) Seriously, that's
been a problem with the original FAQ, we just got too many things there
which would age and become outdated without being maintained
On Sat, 2 Jan 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> That said, mirrors.laffeycomputer.com may indeed not be active
> anymore. Let me include mirrormas...@laffey.biz, the documented
> contact for that mirror.
>
> mirrormas...@laffey.biz, would you mind letting us know about the
>
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> It is according to http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cpplib.html that such
>> support is planned.
> That page generally appears very out of date; it's not been updated since
> 2002.
>
> I have a 15-point todo list for extended identifiers, the very last po
As http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-05/msg00120.html shows,
*-unknown-freebsd* exhibits tons of failures around LTO.
I dug a bit deeper, and even the most trivial test program
int main() { }
fails with
lto1: internal compiler error: compressed stream: data error
Please submit a ful
On Thu, 6 May 2010, Krzysztof ?elechowski wrote:
> Regarding your page "GCC mirror sites"
> http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html>:
>
> * ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/unix/languages/gcc/> is empty.
> * ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/misc/gcc/> is broken.
> * http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/pub/gnu/mirror/gcc.gnu.org/pub/gc
On Sat, 22 May 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Hm, so you didn't test FreeBSD's libelf without Kias patch but my GCC patch
> applied. (at least my patch doesn't make the situation worse for any case
> it seems)
I'll be submitting result for that around noon your time tomorrow-
Right now I am test
On Thu, 20 May 2010, Kai Wang wrote:
> The elf_getbase() API in FreeBSD libelf can only be called using an
> archive member ELF descriptor. It will return -1 (indicates an error)
> when called with a "regular" ELF object.
>
> The lto_obj_build_section_table() function in lto-elf.c calls
> elf_ge
On Sat, 22 May 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> I'll be submitting result for that around noon your time tomorrow-
> Right now I am testing vanilla GCC and patched FreeBSD libelf, my
> tester is just rather slow.
Like Kai's patch to FreeBSD's libelf
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml
On Sat, 22 May 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
> The GCC 4.3.5 release has been created and uploaded, it will
> be announced once the mirrors had a chance to pick it up.
> [...]
> I will continue to send status reports for the 4.3 branch when
> applicable.
I am wondering, should I stop the weekly sn
On Mon, 24 May 2010, James Miller wrote:
> We have raised a new GCC mirror at http://gcc.parentinginformed.com.
> The mirror is located in Canada and I am the contact point for it.
Thanks for setting up a mirror and letting us now. I just added this
to our mirrors list at http://gcc.gnu.org/mirro
On Sun, 23 May 2010, Kai Wang wrote:
>> Based on this, it will be great if you can apply your patch to
>> -CURRENT, 8-STABLE and 7-STABLE.
> I'll see what I can do.
Thanks!
> The elf_update() failure is caused by an alignment check inside
> FreeBSD elf_update(). [...]
> Anyway, I attached a patc
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Todd Rinaldo wrote:
> Your FAQ at the below URLS conflicts as to which autoconf should be
> used. one says 2.13 th other says 2.64. 2.65 is currently available.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#generated_files
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
Thanks for your
On Sun, 30 May 2010, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> Perhaps the question becomes: whom should I ask permission to add an
> exception to MELT code's license to permit it to generate a *texi
> documentation, or alternatively to relicense all existing melt*texi
> files under GPL (so MELT documentation
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> As I was about to check in the -mrecip changes for powerpc on GCC 4.6,
>> I figured to get a start on documentation, and I was going to edit the
>> gcc-4.6/changes.html file. I realize this is early in the cycle, but
>> did we want to create the gc
It has been reported via the FSF that 'gfortran.info' is copyrighted by
the FSF '1999-2008', although it should be under the form '1999, 2000,
[other years], 2008'.
Indeed the GNU Coding Standards say the following:
Do not abbreviate the year list using a range; for instance, do not
write
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> [Now using the text suggested by David.]
>
> Probably no one uses these old processors anymore, and support for
> them is getting in the way of other work in the rs6000 port.
Well, if this is the text that David suggested, I say go ahead and commit.
Hi guys in libstd++ land,
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> The FSF has requested that we move our documentation license from
>> GFDL 1.2 to GFDL 1.3.
> The DocBook documentation for libstdc++ will also need its license
> notices and copy of the GFDL updated.
would you mind making th
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> * doc/Makefile.am, doc/Makefile.in (xml_sources_extra): Add
>> fdl-1.3.xml.
>> * doc/xml/manual/intro.xml: Update FDL link.
>> * doc/xml/manual/spine.xml: Update FDL include.
>> * doc/xml/gnu/fdl-1.3.xml: Add.
>>
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Here are a few of the people with access to the copyright list: me, Ian,
>> Benjamin Koznik, David Edelsohn, Andreas Schwab, Joseph Myers, Ralf
>> Wildenhues. This is not a complete list, just people that I remember.
> I also have access and am happy to be a
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>> It has been reported via the FSF that 'gfortran.info' is copyrighted by
>> the FSF '1999-2008', although it should be under the form '1999, 2000,
>> [other years], 2008'.
> Fixed in Rev. 160390 using the attached patch.
Thanks, Tobias!
Any chance you
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Thanks, see /home/gccadmin/scripts/update_web_docs_libstdcxx_svn
I ran this script, and verified that it runs daily, 55 minutes after
midnight UTC. Alas, it seems the script does not lead to the desired
result -- the libstdc++ onlinedocs/ pages appear
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> Thanks, see /home/gccadmin/scripts/update_web_docs_libstdcxx_svn
> I ran this script, and verified that it runs daily, 55 minutes after
> midnight UTC. Alas, it seems the script does not lead to the desired
> result -- the libstdc++ on
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>>> Thanks, see /home/gccadmin/scripts/update_web_docs_libstdcxx_svn
> The script places up-to-date .html.gz files in the web infrastructure,
> alas we do have older .html there -- and our web server is happy to
> serve those over t
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Ben White wrote:
> Would a modestly modified copy of Bugzilla be workable for that
> something? I.E. Patchzilla?
We actually do have an issue with the Bugzilla instance on gcc.gnu.org
being rather old, so if anyone with Bugzilla foo wants to donate time
and effort, looking int
On Mon, 24 May 2010, Richard Kenner wrote:
> I think that's a critical distinction. I can't see removing a port just
> because it's not used much (or at all) because it might be valuable for
> historical reason or to show examples for how to do things. If the
> maintenance burden of keeping tha
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Bah! Someone already volunteered to do it in several occasions.
> Myself, a long time ago. Someone else a few months ago, Frederic
> Buclin volunteered to help and Nightstrike in that very same PR. The
> answer was silence. It is not a matter of vol
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Michael Eager wrote:
> Could someone please review these patches?
>
> Add support for Xilinx MicroBlaze processor:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg01903.html
This is okay with three small changes.
Please use "Do not" instead of "Don't" in invoke.texi.
Use
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> From http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-09/msg00501.html:
>> It was also suggested to change hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
>> to ia64-hpux and to change s390-linux-gnu to s390x-linux-gnu in the
>> list of secondary targets.
> Shall we proceed?
I'd say "Yes", and I di
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Well, let me add one short comment then. I'd say hppa2-hpux is still
> much more relevant than ia64-hpux -- at least, everywhere I'm looking
> i.e. workstations. It may be different in the server market.
>
> Anyway, when I look at posted gcc-testresult
Todd,
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Todd Rinaldo wrote:
> I'm writing to report a discrepancy in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
>
> I just discovered that if gmp is boot strapped during gcc build and an
> older m4 exists, when gmp calls flex, it will fail during configure
> with:
>
>
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> How shall we address this for real? Is it really worthwhile to
>> manually generate those .html.gz files for onlinedocs/libstdc++ or
>> could we simply omit that step? Not sure it's really worth the
>> hassles?
> I have no idea why we gzip them, i
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> I would rather move to this structure for release documentation. And
> then just have some nightly run on gcc.gnu.or on a properly configured
> machine that just generates the documentation directly from the sources.
gcc.gnu.org will be preferrable, I
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> Please, members of the SC, make this case.
Done. I, too, find the removal of freedoms that the incompatible GNU
licenses (GPLv2 vs GPLv3, GPL vs GFDL,...) create rather unacceptable.
Gerald
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
>> gcc.gnu.org will be preferrable, I think. That allows a number of us
>> to help out if neede, re-running scripts, etc.
> Right. The Makefiles are set up for this now.
Cool.
>> For the time being I suggest to apply the patch below, though. What
>>
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Mark Hahn wrote:
> this mirror seems to be stuck at versions around late 2009.
Thanks for letting us know, Mark.
Let me include i...@internet.bs -- can you fix this or should I remove
your mirror?
Gerald
On Sun, 8 Aug 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> this mirror seems to be stuck at versions around late 2009.
> Thanks for letting us know, Mark.
I understand this may being addressed by the admins who I contacted,
but since that has not happened for nearly a week, I am applying the
patch
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> Would be nice to have md5 sums there also
>
> $ /opt/csw/bin/openssl md5 gcc-4.4-20080725.tar.bz2
> MD5(gcc-4.4-20080725.tar.bz2)= 865deaea79c12635f9a9b92937df8d41
>
> etc etc
This is an excellent idea. I just implemented a change to that
effect and t
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010, gccad...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
> gcc-4.3-20100815.tar.bz2 Complete GCC (includes all of below)
>
>
> SHA1=4fa7230c4535f91521bda26cc225508fe0b4e626
In case anyone wonders, given the weakness of md5 I added sha1 as an
additional hash¹. md5 is just missing due t
Hi Rick (and others),
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> This question would have been more appropriate on the gcc-help mailing
>> list. -Ian Lance Taylor
> My apologies to everyone. I did not know such a list existed.
all of our web pages have a footer which refers to gcc-help, but
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010, Rick Hodgin wrote:
> For what it's worth. One of the pages I went to had the email address as
> g...@gnu.org, not even g...@gcc.gnu.org. Somebody corrected me on that
> already too. :-)
Both addresses -- gcc@gcc.gnu.org and g...@gnu.org -- actually work,
interchangably. I d
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> This is an excellent idea. I just implemented a change to that
> effect and today's snapshot for GCC 4.6 has this:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-08/msg00232.html
>
> I am not really satisfied about how this looks yet
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> In: http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/
>>
>> Broken links in the “Documentation” panel on the right:
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/ (Empty directory)
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/specific.html
>> http://www.gnu.org/
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Oh, additional patch for libgcc is also needed. Attached patch will
> enable filtering out TImode on 32bits and will also enable fallbacks
> for the two missing functions, so no need for any other changes.
>
> Can you please regression test these two patch
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> Can you please regression test these two patches on freebsd (32 and 64
>> bit)?
> Tests running...
Looks like a nice improvement, actually. On both this fixes previously
existing test failures and adds some passes (no changes on the
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/ (Empty directory)
>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/specific.html
>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/test.html
> Thanks for the report, Gareth. I
Between September 2nd
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-09/msg00197.html
and September 3rd
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-09/msg00282.html
DFP support broke quite a bit on FreeBSD.
Failures happen at link time. The following is a typical example for
FAIL: g++.dg/compat/de
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010, NightStrike wrote:
> Yes, definitely bring it up. I'm just trying to get more cards
> stacked in our favor :)
Do you have a pointer to testresults you'd like us to use for reference?
>From our release criteria, for secondary platforms we have:
• The compiler bootstraps suc
Anton reports that GCC fails to build on FreeBSD/ia64. Any ideas
on what to try? I assume it's just a small change that caused this
regression (this used to work some releases ago).
gmake[4]: Entering directory `/usr/ports/lang/gcc46/work/build/gcc'
gmake[4]: *** No rule to make target
`/usr/po
On Mon, 6 Sep 2010, Tom Browder wrote:
> I was working on a gcc bugzilla project upgrade under Daniel Berlin's
> guidance but have not been able to contact him in a long while.
>
> Can anyone give me a current address for him or another dev's name who I
> can work with?
I thought Frédéric Buclin
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010, Sergey Ivanov wrote:
> http://gcc.skazkaforyou.com
>
> location: Canada
>
> Please contact me about this mirror.
Thanks, Sergey! I am adding this to our mirror list per the patch below.
Gerald
Index: mirrors.html
==
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Slevin Black wrote:
> http://mirrorpool.in/ mirroring gcc at http://mirrorpool.in/Gcc/.
> The mirror will be updated daily and is available to the public. The
> maintainer can be reached at top...@gmail.com.
> It`s located in Chicago, UNITED STATES.
Thanks for setting up this
On Fri, 10 Sep 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>> The docs say...
>>
>> @item -Os
>> @opindex Os
>> Optimize for size. �...@option{-os} enables all @option{-O2} optimizations
>> that
>> do not typically increase code size. It also performs further
>> optimizations designed to reduce code size.
>>
>>
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> This is just a friendly letter. There probably will not be another GCC
>> update from the Sunfreeware site ( which is still showing 3.4.6 ) for a
>> long time now that Oracle has pulled finances
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Dave Korn wrote on Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 01:42:15PM CEST:
>> I can't find any mention of it at the usual place for external sources
>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#upstream), so is our version
>> forked, or is that just an oversight?
> I
On Sun, 17 Oct 2010, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> So I will ask face to face practical advices on these issues, in
>>> particular I need to understand who is able to give me constructive &
>>> "definitive" advices (apparently I asked on licens...@fsf.org and Karl
>>> Berry replied, but probably his o
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, James Miller wrote:
> Our mirror address has been changed from
>
> http://gcc.parentinginformed.com/
>
> to
>
> http://gcc.parentingamerica.com/
>
> Please update your list to use the new URL.
>
> Also please use new e-mail to contact me when necessary:
> jmil...@parentinga
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Is it possible to build and test java without all of libjava?
configure --disable-libgcj. I have been using this for my daily
bootstraps for a while.
Gerald
On Sun, 7 Nov 2010, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> Is it possible to access svn+ssh:gcc.gnu.org with two different keys?
> What is the exact procedure?
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SSH_connection_caching is suggesting
> ssh gcc.gnu.org appendkey -- does it work as I understand?
That is my understa
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> To the steering committee: I propose Ralf Wildenhues as a new maintainer
> for the build machinery.
I've relayed this proposal, thanks Ian. (Ralf, I assume you are fine
with this or you would speak up. ;-)
Gerald
On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> To the steering committee: I propose Ralf Wildenhues as a new
>> maintainer for the build machinery.
> I've relayed this proposal, thanks Ian.
I am happy to announce Ralf's appointment as build machinery maintainer.
As u
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Peter Vrzak wrote:
> We have launched a new GCC mirror server offering HTTP access.
> http://mirrors-us.seosue.com/gcc/
>
> The server is located in Tampa, FL, United States.
Thanks, Peter. I announced the mirror per the below.
> The update is scheduled twice a week.
Is th
Looking at
http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html
I noticed that the following entry
Viet Nam, HoChiMinh: http://mirror-fpt-telecom.fpt.net/gcc/,
thanks to Minh Vu Tong (mirror at fpt dot net)
is not working any more. It seems a symbolic link from
http://mirror-fpt-telecom.fpt.net/gcc/ to
http:
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Vu Tong Minh wrote:
> I fixed the symbolic link. It's http://mirror-fpt-telecom.fpt.net/gcc
Excellent, thanks a lot!
Gerald
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, DJ Delorie wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/rsync.html says 17 Gb.
>
> I just did it, and it's up to 22 Gb.
Thanks for the heads up, DJ! I had a look, and it is, in fact,
184 Gb as of today, or 23 GB. (SCNR. :-)
I am applying the patch below.
Gerald
Index: rsync.html
=
I am trying to debug this, alas not very successfully so far and am
looking for a pointer or two.
This happens with head as well; binutils (/usr/local/bin/ld) is 2.20.1.
Note 1: This can be avoid configuring with --disable-rpath. GCC
understands --disable-rpath, yet the string "rpath" does not
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Could be libtool issue or lib-link.m4 one (or gcj one). Can you send
> ./libtool --tag=GCJ --config
> output?
I assume you mean from libjava in the build tree? Attached.
(Note this is now x86_64-portbld-freebsd8.2, newer than the original
report, b
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> I already sent in a bug with gccbug, hope it shows up
> How long do one have to wait until it is visible?
The server side got lost during the last Bugzilla upgrade, so
the gccbug script is not working any more (and has been removed
for GCC 4.6).
Andi,
On Sun, 2 May 2010, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> The obvious thing to do is to add a note that it represents state as of
> 2002. Some bits are probably still relevant, but I don't know which.
That's a good idea. Implemented thusly (if late).
Gerald
Index: cpplib.html
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, Joern Rennecke wrote:
Please read the node "Register Classes" in doc/tm.texi .
I am sorry , could you please highlight the relevant portion for me?
In the pattern that i have given the combination (a,W) satisfies the
pattern. But its not matched because i have given then lik
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Jie Zhang wrote:
> I agree. I think Joseph is the best candidate for the maintainer of the
> option handling since he made the most changes of gcc/opts-common.c. He
> is already the maintainer of the driver. If we unify these two
> maintainerships, we save one line of MAINTA
Hi Walter,
On Sun, 6 Jul 2008, Walter Spector wrote:
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/binaries.html
> OTOH, the SGI freeware site is frozen, and nekochan is where much of
> the real freeware development for IRIX is.
if you check out the updated version of the page above, does this
look good to you
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> This is http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42524
>> aka http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21206
> Ah, yes. It seems I approved the fix for this in2006, but it never
> went in.
Hmm, looking into Bugzilla Ralf did have an issue with
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> This is OK for mainline and 4.1.
> Please cite PR target/25864 in the ChangeLog entry.
Personally, and explicitly not speaking for my employer, I fully agree
with Andrew Pinski that this kind of change is not appropriate for GCC
4.1 at this point in the
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, H. J. Lu wrote:
> My memory hog patch for make has 2 typos. This patch fixes them.
Thanks, H. J. What's the upstream status of your patches? Did you
submit your updated patch there as well?
(As long as this patch, or a similar change, has not become part of a
released versi
Hi Paolo,
thanks for the patch. I just saw Joseph's okay, but I believe there
is one minor detail left.
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> +GNU Make 3.79 and above, which is necessary to build GCC, support
> +building in parallel.
Specifically, in the sentence above we have "which is"
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, H. J. Lu wrote:
> 3.81rc1 works much better than 3.80. But my patch for 3.80 no longer
> applies cleanly. Paul is aware of the libjava build problem and is
> working on it.
That's good news, thanks! I'll give 3.81 RC1 a try, and hope we'll
have a release soon...
Gerald
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Boris Pereira wrote:
> this link to
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html
>
> in page
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/
Thanks for the report, this has been fixed now. (Thanks, Joseph et al!)
Gerald
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, David Edelsohn wrote:
>Andrew> Your attitude towards Joern's request for help with a regression was
>really
>Andrew> what got my over the board. Your suggestion that a primary target was
>more
>Andrew> important even for an enhancement matter than over a regression was
>real
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Cross building and installing gcc-4.1.0 rc2 (--prefix=/usr/local)
> installs these headers:
>
> /usr/local/include/ssp/unistd.h
> /usr/local/include/ssp/string.h
> /usr/local/include/ssp/ssp.h
> /usr/local/include/ssp/stdio.h
>
> Is this behavior corre
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, John Sullivan via RT wrote:
> I'm doing some housecleaning, and thought I should pass on this rather
> old message to you that we received in the GNU Webmasters queue about
> the sidebar on your web pages.
>
> Can someone acknowledge this? Thanks!
Acknowledged. I installed t
[ gcc-patches -> gcc ]
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> That said, I guess it's fine to ignore the ones with makeinfo 4.5,
>> but based on my checks I'd be rather hesitant for us to require
>> anything later than 4.6.
> I don't think we should tie our own hands in this way. Building G
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> It is a bit weird that objcp is included in the gcc-core download. It
>> could be included in the gcc-objc download (or in a separate objcp
>> download). But
> It should go in an objcp download. sourcebuild.texi includes updating
> the release scr
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> Are statistics for GCC download available somewhere? I suspect
> in these days of broadband that just about everyone gets the full
> tarball (especially for releases...).
The FreeSD ports, for example, by default do not build gfortran nor
Java at this p
501 - 600 of 883 matches
Mail list logo
