public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails
@ 2003-08-21 22:06 dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-08-21 22:15 ` [Bug bootstrap/12025] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 more replies)
0 siblings, 9 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: dhazeghi at yahoo dot com @ 2003-08-21 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
Summary: combined build of i960 coff fails
Product: gcc
Version: 3.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: i960-coff
Using mainline, combined tree build for i960-coff cross target fails. Configured as:
../combined/configure --target=i960-coff --enable-languages=c,c++,objc
Build fails:
checking for i960-coff-gcc... (cached) /tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/mainline/objdir/
gcc/ -nostdinc -B/tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/newlib/ -isystem /tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-
coff/newlib/targ-include -isystem /tmp/mainline/combined/newlib/libc/include -B/usr/local/
i960-coff/bin/ -B/usr/local/i960-coff/lib/ -isystem /usr/local/i960-coff/include -isystem /usr/
local/i960-coff/sys-include -L/tmp/mainline/objdir/ld
checking for C compiler default output... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
See `config.log' for more details.
make: *** [configure-target-libstdc++-v3] Error 1
Problem is:
configure:2352: /tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/ -nostdinc -B/tmp/
mainline/objdir/i960-coff/newlib/ -isystem /tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/newlib/targ-include
-isystem /tmp/mainline/combined/newlib/libc/include -B/usr/local/i960-coff/bin/ -B/usr/local/
i960-coff/lib/ -isystem /usr/local/i960-coff/include -isystem /usr/local/i960-coff/sys-include -
L/tmp/mainline/objdir/ld -O2 -g -O2 -O2 -g -O2 conftest.c >&5
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/crt0.o(.text+0x4c): In function `_start':
/tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/libgloss/i960/../../../../combined/libgloss/i960/crt0.c:61:
undefined reference to `_brk'
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/crt0.o(.text+0x6c):/tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/libgloss/i960/../../
../../combined/libgloss/i960/crt0.c:63: undefined reference to `_memset'
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/crt0.o(.text+0x8c):/tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/libgloss/i960/../../
../../combined/libgloss/i960/crt0.c:65: undefined reference to `_exit'
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/libgcc.a(__main.o)(.text+0xb0): In function `__do_global_ctors':
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/../../combined/gcc/libgcc2.c:1680: undefined reference to `_atexit'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
@ 2003-08-21 22:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-08-21 22:38 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-08-21 22:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-08-21 22:15 -------
These parts look like newlib bugs:
/tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/libgloss/i960/../../../../combined/libgloss/i960/crt0.c:61:
undefined reference to `_brk'
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/crt0.o(.text+0x6c):/tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/libgloss/i960/../../
../../combined/libgloss/i960/crt0.c:63: undefined reference to `_memset'
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/crt0.o(.text+0x8c):/tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/libgloss/i960/../../
../../combined/libgloss/i960/crt0.c:65: undefined reference to `_exit'
The other part:
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/libgcc.a(__main.o)(.text+0xb0): In function `__do_global_ctors':
/tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/../../combined/gcc/libgcc2.c:1680: undefined reference to `_atexit'
is a GCC bug but it might also be a newlib bug
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-08-21 22:15 ` [Bug bootstrap/12025] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-08-21 22:38 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-08-22 0:00 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: dhazeghi at yahoo dot com @ 2003-08-21 22:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2003-08-21 22:38 -------
I'm not so sure, but I'll ask newlib...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-08-21 22:15 ` [Bug bootstrap/12025] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-08-21 22:38 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
@ 2003-08-22 0:00 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
2003-08-23 17:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: wilson at tuliptree dot org @ 2003-08-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
------- Additional Comments From wilson at tuliptree dot org 2003-08-22 00:00 -------
Subject: Re: New: combined build of i960 coff fails
dhazeghi at yahoo dot com wrote:
> Summary: combined build of i960 coff fails
The i960 port is effectively dead. It has been unmaintained for several
years. I keep trying to kill it, but people who aren't willing to
maintain it themselves keep claiming that they need it, so it continues
on, half-dead and half-alive.
> /tmp/mainline/objdir/gcc/crt0.o(.text+0x4c): In function `_start':
> /tmp/mainline/objdir/i960-coff/libgloss/i960/../../../../combined/libgloss/i960/crt0.c:61:
> undefined reference to `_brk
>...
I don't really care, but I'm guessing that the problem is LIB_SPEC
doesn't include -lc, on the assumption that it will be provided by the
linker script. Some embedded ports will only build if you specify the
linker script. Maybe putting -Wl,-Tmon960.ld in CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET in
the toplevel Makefile would work? Or maybe we should redesign how this
stuff works.
Note that gcc/config/libgloss.h sets LIB_SPEC to a null string.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2003-08-22 0:00 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
@ 2003-08-23 17:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-18 3:21 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-08-23 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|3.4 |---
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2003-08-23 17:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-18 3:21 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-10-21 1:06 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: dhazeghi at yahoo dot com @ 2003-10-18 3:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |wilson at tuliptree dot org
------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2003-10-18 03:18 -------
If the i960 port really is dead, why don't we deprecate it in 3.4 (or even remove it)? As for those
who claim they need it, they can always keep the current source. I just don't see the point in
keeping something nonbuildable and unmaintained in the tree. What you think?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-18 3:21 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
@ 2003-10-21 1:06 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
2003-11-28 8:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: wilson at tuliptree dot org @ 2003-10-21 1:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
------- Additional Comments From wilson at tuliptree dot org 2003-10-21 00:47 -------
Subject: Re: combined build of i960 coff fails
On Fri, 2003-10-17 at 20:18, dhazeghi at yahoo dot com wrote:
> If the i960 port really is dead, why don't we deprecate it in 3.4 (or even remove it)? As for those
> who claim they need it, they can always keep the current source. I just don't see the point in
> keeping something nonbuildable and unmaintained in the tree. What you think?
I have recommended it for deprecation every time the subject has come
up. So far, I haven't been successful. We have mainly been doing non
controversial deprecations, e.g. if anyone claims they need a port, we
don't deprecate it. Every time I've tried to get the i960 port
deprecated, someone has claimed that they needed it. No one has ever
stepped forward to help fix bugs in it though, and I haven't seen any
evidence that anyone is actually trying to use it. Eventually, the
stalemate will be broken, but for now, it remains an unmaintained and
often unbuildable port.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-21 1:06 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
@ 2003-11-28 8:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-11-28 8:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-08-12 0:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-11-28 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-11-28 08:31 -------
Confirmed but ...
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2003-11-28 08:31:20
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2003-11-28 8:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-11-28 8:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-08-12 0:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-11-28 8:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-11-28 08:32 -------
suspending it based on the fact it is on the list to deprecation (and no one has
complained yet :) ).
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2003-11-28 8:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-08-12 0:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-08-12 0:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-08-12 00:31 -------
Guess what this configuration has been removed for 3.5.0.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
Target Milestone|--- |3.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-08-12 0:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-08-21 22:06 [Bug bootstrap/12025] New: combined build of i960 coff fails dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-08-21 22:15 ` [Bug bootstrap/12025] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-08-21 22:38 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-08-22 0:00 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
2003-08-23 17:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-18 3:21 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-10-21 1:06 ` wilson at tuliptree dot org
2003-11-28 8:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-11-28 8:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-08-12 0:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).