* [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
@ 2002-10-21 0:56 Zack Weinberg
2002-10-21 2:16 ` Matthias Klose
2002-10-21 8:37 ` Mark Mitchell
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-10-21 0:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc; +Cc: mark, debian-gcc
This is a quote from the Debian package changelog for gcc 3.2:
* FTBS: With the switch to bison-1.50 (and 1.75), gcc-3.2 fails to build from
source on Debian unstable systems. This is fixed in gcc HEAD, but not on
the current release branch.
HELP NEEDED:
- check what is missing from the patches in debian/patches/bison.dpatch.
This is a backport of the bison related patches, but showing regressions
in the gcc testsuite, so it cannot be applied.
- build gcc using byacc (bootstrap currently fails using byacc).
- build bison-1.35 in it's own package (the current 1.35-3 package fails
to build form source).
- and finally ask upstream to backport the patch to the branch. It's not
helpful not beeing able to follow the stable branch. Maybe we should
just switch to gcc HEAD as BSD does ...
As a terrible workaround, build the sources from CVS first on a machine,
with bison-1.35 installed, then package the tarball, so the bison
generated files are not rebuilt.
I think we should reconsider not backporting the patches for bison 1.50
to the 3.2 branch.
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
2002-10-21 0:56 [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50? Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-10-21 2:16 ` Matthias Klose
2002-10-21 8:37 ` Mark Mitchell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Matthias Klose @ 2002-10-21 2:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: gcc, mark, debian-gcc
Zack Weinberg writes:
> This is a quote from the Debian package changelog for gcc 3.2:
>
> * FTBS: With the switch to bison-1.50 (and 1.75), gcc-3.2 fails to build from
> source on Debian unstable systems. This is fixed in gcc HEAD, but not on
> the current release branch.
> HELP NEEDED:
> - check what is missing from the patches in debian/patches/bison.dpatch.
> This is a backport of the bison related patches, but showing regressions
> in the gcc testsuite, so it cannot be applied.
> - build gcc using byacc (bootstrap currently fails using byacc).
> - build bison-1.35 in it's own package (the current 1.35-3 package fails
> to build form source).
> - and finally ask upstream to backport the patch to the branch. It's not
> helpful not beeing able to follow the stable branch. Maybe we should
> just switch to gcc HEAD as BSD does ...
> As a terrible workaround, build the sources from CVS first on a machine,
> with bison-1.35 installed, then package the tarball, so the bison
> generated files are not rebuilt.
>
> I think we should reconsider not backporting the patches for bison 1.50
> to the 3.2 branch.
btw, I noticed the very same regressions on HEAD hppa-linux, but not
on HEAD i386-linux.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
2002-10-21 0:56 [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50? Zack Weinberg
2002-10-21 2:16 ` Matthias Klose
@ 2002-10-21 8:37 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-21 8:40 ` Matthias Klose
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mark Mitchell @ 2002-10-21 8:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg, gcc; +Cc: debian-gcc
> I think we should reconsider not backporting the patches for bison 1.50
> to the 3.2 branch.
OK; let's reconsider. Please point me at the patches.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
2002-10-21 8:37 ` Mark Mitchell
@ 2002-10-21 8:40 ` Matthias Klose
2002-10-21 11:47 ` Mark Mitchell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Matthias Klose @ 2002-10-21 8:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Mitchell; +Cc: Zack Weinberg, gcc, debian-gcc
Mark Mitchell writes:
> > I think we should reconsider not backporting the patches for bison 1.50
> > to the 3.2 branch.
>
> OK; let's reconsider. Please point me at the patches.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg00787.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
2002-10-21 8:40 ` Matthias Klose
@ 2002-10-21 11:47 ` Mark Mitchell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mark Mitchell @ 2002-10-21 11:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthias Klose; +Cc: Zack Weinberg, gcc, debian-gcc
--On Monday, October 21, 2002 10:18:06 AM +0200 Matthias Klose
<doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Mark Mitchell writes:
>> > I think we should reconsider not backporting the patches for bison 1.50
>> > to the 3.2 branch.
>>
>> OK; let's reconsider. Please point me at the patches.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg00787.html
Very well; go ahead and apply those patches.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-10-21 15:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-10-21 0:56 [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50? Zack Weinberg
2002-10-21 2:16 ` Matthias Klose
2002-10-21 8:37 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-21 8:40 ` Matthias Klose
2002-10-21 11:47 ` Mark Mitchell
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).