David Craven skribis:
>> ‘core-updates’ is now building with a tiny patch on gcc-4.9 (in fact
>> it’s enough to apply it to gcc-cross-boot0, which is interesting):
>
> Does this also fix the bootstrap failure with gcc 5? Or is that too late
> for this core-updates cycle?
I think we should rather
> ‘core-updates’ is now building with a tiny patch on gcc-4.9 (in fact
> it’s enough to apply it to gcc-cross-boot0, which is interesting):
Does this also fix the bootstrap failure with gcc 5? Or is that too late
for this core-updates cycle?
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
[...]
>> For the record, this is how far I got with GCC 5:
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399
>
> I’ve made some progress on this, as reported on bugzilla. I’m now
> trying to bisect the is
> I’ve made some progress on this, as reported on bugzilla. I’m now
> trying to bisect the issue; however, since the bootstrapping failure of
> gcc-final is due to a problem that manifests in gcc-boot0, that’s a lot
> of rebuild, and the machine I’m using (redhill) is slow.
>
> Anyway, we’ll have
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
> Mark H Weaver skribis:
>
>> David Craven writes:
>>
>>> I can help fixing package regressions if someone gets the ball
>>> rolling. Is there a reason to upgrade to gcc 5 or does it make sense
>>> to jump to gcc 6 directly? If I understand correctly most
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> David Craven writes:
>
>> I can help fixing package regressions if someone gets the ball
>> rolling. Is there a reason to upgrade to gcc 5 or does it make sense
>> to jump to gcc 6 directly? If I understand correctly most of the work
>> required for an update to gcc 5 ha
> Until the bootstrapping problem on ARM is fixed, we can't do any of
> this. At the moment, that's blocking us from even updating to 4.9.4,
> nevermind 5 or 6. If you want to help us upgrade our default GCC,
> investigating that problem would be the best way.
I have some unfinished stuff that I
David Craven writes:
> I can help fixing package regressions if someone gets the ball
> rolling. Is there a reason to upgrade to gcc 5 or does it make sense
> to jump to gcc 6 directly? If I understand correctly most of the work
> required for an update to gcc 5 has already been done?
Until the
On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 02:17:10PM +0200, David Craven wrote:
> Why are we using different package versions for the arm bootstrap
> binaries than for other platforms?
Simply because they have been created later, and there was no reason
to change the existing ones.
Andreas
Why are we using different package versions for the arm bootstrap
binaries than for other platforms?
I can help fixing package regressions if someone gets the ball
rolling. Is there a reason to upgrade to gcc 5 or does it make sense
to jump to gcc 6 directly? If I understand correctly most of the work
required for an update to gcc 5 has already been done?
Picking up an old thread...
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> For the record, at this point I’m mostly relying on the GCC developers
> to help with this failure. I’ve reported the issue at:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399
Interestingly, a similar bootstrapping fa
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:16:18PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:13:43AM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:58:32AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > > I hope we can make progress on this soon. In the meantime, I think we
> > > sh
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:13:43AM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:58:32AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > I hope we can make progress on this soon. In the meantime, I think we
> > should do a bit of “ungrafting” in core-updates and get it built.
>
> the core
Hello,
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:58:32AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> I hope we can make progress on this soon. In the meantime, I think we
> should do a bit of “ungrafting” in core-updates and get it built.
the core subset built well (on mips, a few packages are still missing),
so I started
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 12:04:09PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:58:32AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
> >
> > > For the record, at this point I’m mostly relying on the GCC developers
> > > to help with this failure
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:58:32AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi!
>
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
>
> > For the record, at this point I’m mostly relying on the GCC developers
> > to help with this failure. I’ve reported the issue at:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
Hi!
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
> For the record, at this point I’m mostly relying on the GCC developers
> to help with this failure. I’ve reported the issue at:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399
Because this has already taken too much time, I’ve reverted the
Hello!
For the record, at this point I’m mostly relying on the GCC developers
to help with this failure. I’ve reported the issue at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399
Ludo’.
On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 02:23:15PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Since the full log vanished from hydra.gnu.org (now we have a truncated
> log), could you post the full log somewhere?
>
> Alternately, if you want, you cuold give me access to your Novena. :-)
That sounds like the easiest soluti
Andreas Enge skribis:
> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 05:25:35PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Could you save the offending .o files that are listed and upload them
>> somewhere, or run diffoscope on them?
>
> Of course the first time I forgot to add the "-K" parameter. So I redid the
> build and sa
21 matches
Mail list logo
