https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #22 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
That's a shame. It's just that the error messages look very similar.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #21 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #20)
> Unfortunately, at the face of it, I think the only factors common with
> PR61844 are "rot at the RTL level" and "building libgcc".
Apparently also "w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #20 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Unfortunately, at the face of it, I think the only factors common with PR61844
are "rot at the RTL level" and "building libgcc". (My own involvement with
SH64 is too far in the past and then only perip
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #19 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
This seems to have done the trick, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #17 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Thu Jul 17 03:53:23 2014
New Revision: 212713
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212713&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk.
PR target/61737.
* config/cris/cris.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #16 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Thu Jul 17 02:03:52 2014
New Revision: 212708
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212708&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61737.
* config/cris/cris.c (TARGET_LEGITIMATE_CONSTA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #15 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #14)
> Could you please consider open a separate PR for the "is not reproducible"
> misdisagnosis?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6181
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #14 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #10)
> (In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #7)
> > (In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #0)
> > > I'm also very intrigued by that last lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #13 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #12)
> (In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #6)
> > Created attachment 33121 [details]
> > Patch to config.gcc
> >
> > Correct patch to config.gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #12 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #6)
> Created attachment 33121 [details]
> Patch to config.gcc
>
> Correct patch to config.gcc required to actually build the compiler proper.
Okay
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #11 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #3)
> > libgcc is built with:
> > make -C cris-linux-gnu tooldir=/usr all-target-libgcc
>
> I'd expect "make all-target-libgcc" to Just Work.
So wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #10 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #7)
> (In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #0)
> > I'm also very intrigued by that last line - I can reproduce it quite easily.
>
> This is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #8)
> This symbol_ref must be wrapped inside a CONST by the middle-end.
Uh, strike that, I'm hallucinating.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #0)
> ../../../gcc-4.9.0-20140702/libgcc/libgcc2.c: In function ‘__subvsi3’:
> ../../../gcc-4.9.0-20140702/libgcc/libgcc2.c:122:1: error: unrecognizable
> in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #0)
BTW,
> Please submit a full bug report,
> with preprocessed source if appropriate.
> Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
> See <
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 33121
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33121&action=edit
Patch to config.gcc
Correct patch to config.gcc required to actually build the compiler proper.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2014-7-15
--- Comment #5 from Hans-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #3)
> (In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #1)
> > Index: gcc/config.gcc
> > ===
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #2 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
This also appears to occur for --target=sh64-linux on an unpatched gcc tree.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #1 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
I needed the following change to gcc (courtesy of Nick Clifton) to get cris-gcc
to build at all, even without libgcc:
Index: gcc/config.gcc
==
23 matches
Mail list logo