From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28801 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2002 23:26:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 28786 invoked by uid 71); 5 Dec 2002 23:26:00 -0000 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021205232600.28785.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: bootstrap/6825: [Sun OS 4.1.4] gcc 3.1 fails to build Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00329.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR bootstrap/6825; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: jason andrade Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: bootstrap/6825: [Sun OS 4.1.4] gcc 3.1 fails to build Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:23:06 -0600 (CST) > the problem seems to be because gcc3 doesn't ship with (or sunos doesn't have?) > definitions for a bunch of functions that it thinks it should find, e.g for > div_t and so on. Sorry, but I think I can't help you here. > > > ./configure --prefix=/opt/local/stow/gcc-3.2.1 --enable-languages=c,c++ > > > and > > > make -j2 CFLAGS=-O2 LIBCFLAGS=-O2 LIBCXXFLAGS=-O2 -fno-implicit-templates bootstrap-lean > > > > First, since this failed, could you retry by building in a separate > > build-directory, as the installation instructions recommend? I.e., if > > gcc-3.2.1 is you src dir, then make a parallel directory build and call > > ../gcc-3.2.1/configure --... > > make bootstrap > > i'll try that. will it make much of a difference ? Maybe. It is supposed to work to build in-tree, but it does not get much testing, and it seems to provoke all kinds of strange and hard to track down errors. The recommended version that most of the developers use is to build in a separate build-dir. > > Also, what happens if you don't specify CFLAGS et al? As far as I know the > > stage2 build already uses optimization flags, so there is no need to also > > use them for the first two stages (apart from possibly tripping your > > bootstrapping compiler). > > haven't tried without the cflags. at this stage i am assuming the problem > is specifically with function definition issues for c++, which wouldn't > be influenced by the cflags (but please let me know if i am wrong) Some optimization flags switch on builtins and/or select different math functions. I don't know whether it makes a difference in your case, but it would rule out one possibility for breakage. > when i get a little more time, i am going to try and find all the missing > functions on another more up to date OS and see if i can reuse them on > sunos4. I think this would be appreciated! Regards Wolfgang ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth