From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-62005-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5700 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2002 22:41:50 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5691 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2002 22:41:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.cs.tu-berlin.de) (130.149.17.13)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Oct 2002 22:41:49 -0000
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (daemon@bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.19.1])
	by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA27638;
	Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:40:02 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from doko@localhost)
	by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id g9KMe2M15954;
	Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:40:02 +0200 (MEST)
From: Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <15795.12481.863443.773302@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 02:16:00 -0000
To: Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, mark@codesourcery.com, debian-gcc@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
In-Reply-To: <20021020214101.GA31693@codesourcery.com>
References: <20021020214101.GA31693@codesourcery.com>
X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg01229.txt.bz2

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.