Configuration ouput

Configuration ouput

[kabir.patel]

I ran the ./configure script successfully, but came across the following
messages and wanted to know if they would effect
the build:

a) "Warning: compilation may fail because you're using
/usr/ucb/cc.  You should change your PATH or CC
variable and rerun configure."

I selected CC=cc, which is what I use to run C code normally.

b) "grep: can't open /export/home/kabir/gnu/gcc-3.0.2/libstdc++-v3/configure.in
./config.status is unchanged"

This file (in fact the entire folder libstdc++-v3) doesn't exist. Is it meant
to?

c) "configure: warning: ^M
*** Makeinfo is missing or too old.^M
*** Info documentation will not be built."


Thanks
Kabir


*******************Internet Email Confidentiality Footer*******************


Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message.  If you
are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of
the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone.
In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by
reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer does not consent
to Internet email for messages of this kind.  Opinions, conclusions and other
information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my
firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

RE: Configuration ouput

[Rupert Wood]

Kabir Patel wrote:

> a) "Warning: compilation may fail because you're using
> /usr/ucb/cc.  You should change your PATH or CC
> variable and rerun configure."
> 
> I selected CC=cc, which is what I use to run C code normally.

I don't know the history behind this message; you may want to try:

    CC=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc

instead and see if it prefers that, or to add the /opt/SUNWspro/bin to
your PATH environment before /usr/ucb. I think UCB is 'Unix
Compatibility Binaries' or similar - an interface to the compiler to map
command line switches, etc. - and it probably prefers the compiler
directly.

> b) "grep: can't open 
> /export/home/kabir/gnu/gcc-3.0.2/libstdc++-v3/configure.in
> ./config.status is unchanged"
> 
> This file (in fact the entire folder libstdc++-v3) doesn't 
> exist. Is it meant to?

Not if you're not trying to build a C++ compiler - I think you just
downloaded the 'core' distribution without C++? If so, it shouldn't be
trying to build the C++ compiler, but that might be a build-system bug
rather than any problem your end. Fingers crossed it'll just work.

> c) "configure: warning:
> *** Makeinfo is missing or too old.
> *** Info documentation will not be built."

GCC can regenerate its own documentation from texinfo sources. You don't
have the necessary tools to do this, but that's OK - the distribution
should contain a pre-built copy of the documentation to install. It
certainly won't break a build of the compiler.

gcc and sunwspro

[Chris Trawick]

so using sunwspro to compile gcc is a supported configuration?  i remember
trying that a couple weeks ago first for 3.0.1 and then for 2.95.3.  it was
a nightmare.  stage1 xgcc couldn't find headers, gmake couldn't find
dependencies, object files doing disappearing tricks during link, all
depending on whether i build in the source dir or a separate dir.  i ended
up just using cc for my project chalking a Sun port of post-cygnus gcc to
the masters of binary distribution.  don't remember the exact errors that
occurred though.  are there any solaris quirks that i need to work around to
get it to compile or is the solaris installation i'm working with just
broken?

chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rupert Wood" <me@rupey.net>
To: <kabir.patel@uk.andersen.com>
Cc: <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 6:42 AM
Subject: RE: Configuration ouput


> Kabir Patel wrote:
>
> > a) "Warning: compilation may fail because you're using
> > /usr/ucb/cc.  You should change your PATH or CC
> > variable and rerun configure."
> >
> > I selected CC=cc, which is what I use to run C code normally.
>
> I don't know the history behind this message; you may want to try:
>
>     CC=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc
>
> instead and see if it prefers that, or to add the /opt/SUNWspro/bin to
> your PATH environment before /usr/ucb. I think UCB is 'Unix
> Compatibility Binaries' or similar - an interface to the compiler to map
> command line switches, etc. - and it probably prefers the compiler
> directly.
>
> > b) "grep: can't open
> > /export/home/kabir/gnu/gcc-3.0.2/libstdc++-v3/configure.in
> > ./config.status is unchanged"
> >
> > This file (in fact the entire folder libstdc++-v3) doesn't
> > exist. Is it meant to?
>
> Not if you're not trying to build a C++ compiler - I think you just
> downloaded the 'core' distribution without C++? If so, it shouldn't be
> trying to build the C++ compiler, but that might be a build-system bug
> rather than any problem your end. Fingers crossed it'll just work.
>
> > c) "configure: warning:
> > *** Makeinfo is missing or too old.
> > *** Info documentation will not be built."
>
> GCC can regenerate its own documentation from texinfo sources. You don't
> have the necessary tools to do this, but that's OK - the distribution
> should contain a pre-built copy of the documentation to install. It
> certainly won't break a build of the compiler.
>

RE: gcc and sunwspro

[Rupert Wood]

Chris Trawick wrote:

> so using sunwspro to compile gcc is a supported configuration?  I
> remember trying that a couple weeks ago first for 3.0.1 and then for
> 2.95.3.

I think so. I certainly remember a goal to make GCC buildable starting
with any system C compiler, ANSI or not.

I haven't tried this in a long time, but I have had experience trying to
make oldish snapshots compile for Intel Solaris with SUNWspro 5.0. I
certainly built 3.0 release candidates with SUNWspro (Forte) 6.0 through
u2. However, our Intel Solaris machine is out of commission and the 6.0
compiler eval ended :-) so I can't test it right now.

> stage1 xgcc couldn't find headers, gmake couldn't find dependencies,
> object files doing disappearing tricks during link, all depending on
> whether i build in the source dir or a separate dir.

I'd be surprised if these were compiler problems. More likely, they're
'make' problems (especially given the last bit).

You could try using GNU make. However, I'm not sure how old the versions
you're using are - but everything worked for me. Sorry that's not much
help.

Rup.