* Which version of GCC to use: an example
@ 2002-02-21 1:23 Bob Gustafson
2002-02-21 3:07 ` Frank Schafer
2002-02-21 8:54 ` Claudio Bley
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bob Gustafson @ 2002-02-21 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-help
My goal was to compile and install prcs-1.3.1 (a new source code
control system)
I started out with gcc version 2.96 which is the stock version supplied
with RedHat 7.2 (for i686-pc-linux-gnu)
./configure 2>&1 | tee config.out
make 2>&1 | tee make.out
The last few lines of make.out are:
make[3]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1/src'
c++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I./include -O2 -Wall
-fno-implicit-templates -c prcs.cc
In file included from include/prcs.h:44,
from prcs.cc:27:
/usr/include/g++-3/iostream.h:97: `ostream::operator<<
(char)' has already been declared in `ostream'
/usr/include/g++-3/iostream.h:217: `istream::operator>>
(char &)' has already been declared in `istream'
make[3]: *** [prcs.o] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1/src'
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1/src'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1'
make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2
[root@hoho0 prcs-1.3.1]#
.....
I thought it might be a problem with the compiler, so I downloaded and
installed gcc-3.0.3 and reconfigured and compiled prcs
(files expanded fresh from tar.gz).
It still won't make. Last bit of the make.out file is given below
( make 2>&1 | tee make.out).
...
make[3]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1/src'
c++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I./include -O2 -Wall
-fno-implicit-templates -c prcs.cc
In file included from include/typedefs.h:125,
from include/prcs.h:53,
from prcs.cc:27:
include/prcserror.h:30:25: stdiostream.h:
No such file or directory
In file included from include/typedefs.h:125,
from include/prcs.h:53,
from prcs.cc:27:
include/prcserror.h:455: type specifier omitted for parameter
include/prcserror.h:455: parse error before `*' token
include/prcserror.h:479: syntax error before `*' token
include/prcserror.h:447: base `PrettyOstream' with only non-default
constructor in class without a constructor
include/prcserror.h:509: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:512: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:515: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:518: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:521: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:530: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:533: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:536: parse error before `,' token
include/prcserror.h:537: parse error before `,' token
include/prcserror.h:538: parse error before `)' token
include/prcserror.h:541: parse error before `&' token
include/prcserror.h:544: parse error before `,' token
include/prcserror.h:545: parse error before `,' token
include/prcserror.h:546: parse error before `)' token
include/prcserror.h:554: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:555: parse error before `*' token
include/prcserror.h:556: parse error before `&' token
include/prcserror.h:570: parse error before `char'
include/prcserror.h:589: parse error before `*' token
include/prcserror.h:592: parse error before `*' token
include/prcserror.h:600: parse error before `)' token
prcs.cc: In function `PrPrcsExitStatusError config_command()':
prcs.cc:432: `squote' undeclared (first use this function)
prcs.cc:432: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once for
each function it appears in.)
prcs.cc:433: `setcol' undeclared (first use this function)
prcs.cc: In function `PrPrcsExitStatusError invoke_command(PrcsCommand*)':
prcs.cc:587: `force' undeclared (first use this function)
prcs.cc:588: `report' undeclared (first use this function)
prcs.cc:589: `optfail' undeclared (first use this function)
prcs.cc:590: `defopt' undeclared (first use this function)
prcs.cc:591: `query' undeclared (first use this function)
make[3]: *** [prcs.o] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1/src'
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1/src'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/prcs-1.3.1'
make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2
[root@hoho0 prcs-1.3.1]#
Finally, I installed gcc version 2.95.3 (2.95.3 20010315 (release)) and
this worked fine.
I don't know if there are bugs in the compiler(s) or bugs in prcs-1.3.1,
but this might be a regression test to pass for the newer compilers.
PCRS can be obtained at http://sourceforge.net/projects/prcs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Which version of GCC to use: an example
2002-02-21 1:23 Which version of GCC to use: an example Bob Gustafson
@ 2002-02-21 3:07 ` Frank Schafer
2002-02-21 5:50 ` Huw Lynes
2002-02-21 8:54 ` Claudio Bley
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Frank Schafer @ 2002-02-21 3:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-help
On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 08:46, Bob Gustafson wrote:
> My goal was to compile and install prcs-1.3.1 (a new source code
> control system)
>
> I started out with gcc version 2.96 which is the stock version supplied
> with RedHat 7.2 (for i686-pc-linux-gnu)
There never was a 2.96 release of GCC. This branch was only for
development. If RedHead ships broken compilers with it's release,
RedHead users have to live with this -- haven't they ;-) ?
> I thought it might be a problem with the compiler, so I downloaded and
> installed gcc-3.0.3 and reconfigured and compiled prcs
> (files expanded fresh from tar.gz).
Me too took gcc-3.0.3 last week, to set it up as a secondary compiler
but I don't have much luck with it. To say the thruth - I havent much
time just now for such an experiment.
> Finally, I installed gcc version 2.95.3 (2.95.3 20010315 (release)) and
> this worked fine.
I've already built whole systems with this version. If you have
glibc-2.2.x you'll need the gcc-2.95.3-2.patch.
> I don't know if there are bugs in the compiler(s) or bugs in prcs-1.3.1,
> but this might be a regression test to pass for the newer compilers.
The task for you to find out.
> PCRS can be obtained at http://sourceforge.net/projects/prcs
>
BTW: What's so wrong with CVS?
Regards
Frank
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Which version of GCC to use: an example
2002-02-21 3:07 ` Frank Schafer
@ 2002-02-21 5:50 ` Huw Lynes
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Huw Lynes @ 2002-02-21 5:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-help
On Thursday 21 February 2002 09:30, Frank Schafer wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 08:46, Bob Gustafson wrote:
> > My goal was to compile and install prcs-1.3.1 (a new source code
> > control system)
> >
> > I started out with gcc version 2.96 which is the stock version
> > supplied with RedHat 7.2 (for i686-pc-linux-gnu)
on an RH7.2 system the following often fixes compiler issues;
export CC=kgcc
--
| Huw Lynes | The Moving Picture Company |
| System Administrator | 127 Wardour Street |
|.........................| London, W1F 0NL |
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Which version of GCC to use: an example
2002-02-21 1:23 Which version of GCC to use: an example Bob Gustafson
2002-02-21 3:07 ` Frank Schafer
@ 2002-02-21 8:54 ` Claudio Bley
2002-02-21 9:56 ` Bob Gustafson
2002-02-21 14:19 ` Bob Gustafson
1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Claudio Bley @ 2002-02-21 8:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bob Gustafson; +Cc: gcc-help
>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Gustafson <bobgus@mcs.com> writes:
Bob> My goal was to compile and install prcs-1.3.1 (a new source
Bob> code control system)
Bob> I started out with gcc version 2.96 which is the stock
Bob> version supplied with RedHat 7.2 (for i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Bob> ./configure 2>&1 | tee config.out make 2>&1 | tee make.out
Bob> The last few lines of make.out are:
[snipped]
As Frank Schafer already pointed out, you should never use gcc 2.96
because there never was such a release.
Bob> It still won't make. Last bit of the make.out file is given
Bob> below ( make 2>&1 | tee make.out).
[snipped]
Bob> Finally, I installed gcc version 2.95.3 (2.95.3 20010315
Bob> (release)) and this worked fine.
Bob> I don't know if there are bugs in the compiler(s) or bugs in
Bob> prcs-1.3.1, but this might be a regression test to pass for
Bob> the newer compilers.
prcs is not complying with the ANSI C++ Standard as required by gcc
v3. prcs needs to be fixed until you're able to compile it with gcc
v3.
Bob> PCRS can be obtained at http://sourceforge.net/projects/prcs
Claudio
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Which version of GCC to use: an example
2002-02-21 8:54 ` Claudio Bley
@ 2002-02-21 9:56 ` Bob Gustafson
2002-02-22 12:38 ` Claudio Bley
2002-02-21 14:19 ` Bob Gustafson
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bob Gustafson @ 2002-02-21 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Claudio Bley; +Cc: gcc-help
Claudio == Claudio Bley <bley@cs.uni-magdeburg.de> writes:
>>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Gustafson <bobgus@mcs.com> writes:
>
> Bob> My goal was to compile and install prcs-1.3.1 (a new source
> Bob> code control system)
>
> Bob> I started out with gcc version 2.96 which is the stock
> Bob> version supplied with RedHat 7.2 (for i686-pc-linux-gnu)
>
> Bob> ./configure 2>&1 | tee config.out make 2>&1 | tee make.out
>
> Bob> The last few lines of make.out are:
>
>[snipped]
>
Claudio> As Frank Schafer already pointed out, you should never use gcc 2.96
Claudio> because there never was such a release.
I just used what came with RH 7.2 (However, I am now using 2.95.3)
>
> Bob> It still won't make. Last bit of the make.out file is given
> Bob> below ( make 2>&1 | tee make.out).
>
>[snipped]
>
> Bob> Finally, I installed gcc version 2.95.3 (2.95.3 20010315
> Bob> (release)) and this worked fine.
>
> Bob> I don't know if there are bugs in the compiler(s) or bugs in
> Bob> prcs-1.3.1, but this might be a regression test to pass for
> Bob> the newer compilers.
>
Claudio> prcs is not complying with the ANSI C++ Standard as required by gcc
Claudio> v3. prcs needs to be fixed until you're able to compile it with gcc
Claudio> v3.
From the listing of make errors, do you have any guidance as to what part
of the ANSI C++ Standard is being violated?
Also, if 2.95.3 does the job, why doesn't 3.0.3 flag (and deprecate) the
things that pass 2.95.3 and do not pass 3.0.3 :-)
>
> Bob> PCRS can be obtained at http://sourceforge.net/projects/prcs
>
>Claudio
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Which version of GCC to use: an example
2002-02-21 8:54 ` Claudio Bley
2002-02-21 9:56 ` Bob Gustafson
@ 2002-02-21 14:19 ` Bob Gustafson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bob Gustafson @ 2002-02-21 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Frank Schafer; +Cc: gcc-help
Frank:
I wasn't subscribed until now, so I missed your reply to my original post
On 21 Feb 2002 10:30:58 +0100 Frank Schafer wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 08:46, Bob Gustafson wrote:
>> My goal was to compile and install prcs-1.3.1 (a new source code
>> control system)
>>
>> I started out with gcc version 2.96 which is the stock version supplied
>> with RedHat 7.2 (for i686-pc-linux-gnu)
>
>There never was a 2.96 release of GCC. This branch was only for
>development. If RedHead ships broken compilers with it's release,
>RedHead users have to live with this -- haven't they ;-) ?
I had heard of some controversy about RH's choice of compilers, but now
have switched to 2.95.3
>
>> I thought it might be a problem with the compiler, so I downloaded and
>> installed gcc-3.0.3 and reconfigured and compiled prcs
>> (files expanded fresh from tar.gz).
>
>Me too took gcc-3.0.3 last week, to set it up as a secondary compiler
>but I don't have much luck with it. To say the thruth - I havent much
>time just now for such an experiment.
>
>> Finally, I installed gcc version 2.95.3 (2.95.3 20010315 (release)) and
>> this worked fine.
>
>I've already built whole systems with this version. If you have
>glibc-2.2.x you'll need the gcc-2.95.3-2.patch.
Looking in the build directory for gcc, I see a ./install/glibc-2.2.patch -
I assume that it was applied (??) during the gcc build process (??).
How do I tell for sure? (gcc-2.95.3 was built from source files on this
machine)
It looks like I do have the glibc-2.2.4 (see below)
[user1@hoho0 user1]$ /lib/libc.so.6
GNU C Library stable release version 2.2.4, by Roland McGrath et al.
Copyright (C) 1992-1999, 2000, 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Compiled by GNU CC version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-97).
Compiled on a Linux 2.4.7-6smp system on 2001-09-04.
Available extensions:
GNU libio by Per Bothner
crypt add-on version 2.1 by Michael Glad and others
The C stubs add-on version 2.1.2.
linuxthreads-0.9 by Xavier Leroy
BIND-8.2.3-T5B
NIS(YP)/NIS+ NSS modules 0.19 by Thorsten Kukuk
Glibc-2.0 compatibility add-on by Cristian Gafton
libthread_db work sponsored by Alpha Processor Inc
Report bugs using the `glibcbug' script to <bugs@gnu.org>.
[user1@hoho0 user1]$
>
>> I don't know if there are bugs in the compiler(s) or bugs in prcs-1.3.1,
>> but this might be a regression test to pass for the newer compilers.
>
>The task for you to find out.
>
>> PCRS can be obtained at http://sourceforge.net/projects/prcs
>>
>
>BTW: What's so wrong with CVS?
Nothing too much, but I like to try something new from time to time. I have
CVS, but don't use it enough for my own stuff. Perhaps PCRS will fit in
more naturally. Or, maybe I can just script it to do what needs to be done
automatically. I only need it for backup and to keep my toes from being
shot off.
>
>Regards
>Frank
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Which version of GCC to use: an example
2002-02-21 9:56 ` Bob Gustafson
@ 2002-02-22 12:38 ` Claudio Bley
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Claudio Bley @ 2002-02-22 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bob Gustafson; +Cc: Claudio Bley, gcc-help
>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Gustafson <bobgus@mcs.com> writes:
Bob> Claudio == Claudio Bley <bley@cs.uni-magdeburg.de> writes:
>>>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Gustafson <bobgus@mcs.com> writes:
>>
Bob> My goal was to compile and install prcs-1.3.1 (a new source
Bob> code control system)
>>
Bob> I started out with gcc version 2.96 which is the stock
Bob> version supplied with RedHat 7.2 (for i686-pc-linux-gnu)
>>
Bob> ./configure 2>&1 | tee config.out make 2>&1 | tee make.out
>>
Bob> The last few lines of make.out are:
>> [snipped]
>>
Claudio> As Frank Schafer already pointed out, you should never
Claudio> use gcc 2.96 because there never was such a release.
Bob> I just used what came with RH 7.2 (However, I am now using
Bob> 2.95.3)
Okay, but I never understood why RedHat shipped its distribution with
that compiler, nor did I understand why the GCC people called their
development version "2.96".
>>
Bob> It still won't make. Last bit of the make.out file is given
Bob> below ( make 2>&1 | tee make.out).
>> [snipped]
>>
Bob> Finally, I installed gcc version 2.95.3 (2.95.3 20010315
Bob> (release)) and this worked fine.
>>
Bob> I don't know if there are bugs in the compiler(s) or bugs in
Bob> prcs-1.3.1, but this might be a regression test to pass for
Bob> the newer compilers.
>>
Claudio> prcs is not complying with the ANSI C++ Standard as
Claudio> required by gcc v3. prcs needs to be fixed until you're
Claudio> able to compile it with gcc v3.
>> From the listing of make errors, do you have any guidance as to
>> what part
Bob> of the ANSI C++ Standard is being violated?
At first, stdiostream.h apparently was removed from the stdc++ lib
distributed with gcc v3. Thus, there is no class `stdiobuf' (I
couldn't find it in "The C++ Standard Library" book nor in any of the
header files of gcc's standard c++ library).
The other errors seem to result due gcc getting confused -- it seems
gcc doesn't recognize the `const' keyword anymore... E.g. in
include/prcserror.h:509: parse error before `char' :
omanip<const char*> query(const char* message);
Bob> Also, if 2.95.3 does the job, why doesn't 3.0.3 flag (and
Bob> deprecate) the things that pass 2.95.3 and do not pass 3.0.3
Bob> :-)
I suppose that would blow up the compiler quite a bit. Eventually, you
would need to distribute a complete gcc v2.95 with it in order to say
"hey, it would compile with gcc v2.95.x but not with the release of
gcc you're using now." It's a lot easier to say: "just write standard
compliant code!".
Claudio
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-02-22 20:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-02-21 1:23 Which version of GCC to use: an example Bob Gustafson
2002-02-21 3:07 ` Frank Schafer
2002-02-21 5:50 ` Huw Lynes
2002-02-21 8:54 ` Claudio Bley
2002-02-21 9:56 ` Bob Gustafson
2002-02-22 12:38 ` Claudio Bley
2002-02-21 14:19 ` Bob Gustafson
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).