Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Dennis Clarke]

> "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:
>
>> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
>> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target
>> triplet,
>> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.
>
> target			GCC	GMP	MPFR
>
> sparc-sun-solaris2.11	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
> i386-pc-solaris2.10	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
> mips-sgi-irix6.5	3.4.5	4.3.0	2.3.2
> alpha-dec-osf4.0f	3.4.4	4.2.1	2.3.2
>
> All tests passed everywhere.

what about sparc-sun-solaris2.10 ? sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and 2.8 ?



-- 
Dennis Clarke
dclarke@opensolaris.ca  <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dclarke@blastwave.org   <- Email related to open source for Solaris

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Rainer Orth]

Dennis Clarke writes:

> > "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:
> >
> >> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
> >> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target
> >> triplet,
> >> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.
> >
> > target			GCC	GMP	MPFR
> >
> > sparc-sun-solaris2.11	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
> > i386-pc-solaris2.10	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
> > mips-sgi-irix6.5	3.4.5	4.3.0	2.3.2
> > alpha-dec-osf4.0f	3.4.4	4.2.1	2.3.2
> >
> > All tests passed everywhere.
> 
> what about sparc-sun-solaris2.10 ? sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and 2.8 ?

I don't have Solaris 8 anymore and no Solaris 9/SPARC system appropriate
for GCC testing.  I don't expect differences between Solaris 10 and 11
here, and frankly, I don't have the cycles (human, not machine) to do all
this testing, so I'm relying on user reports should unexpected problems
occur.

	Rainer

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Eric Botcazou]

> what about sparc-sun-solaris2.10 ? sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and 2.8 ?

sparc-sun-solaris2.8 and sparc64-sun-solaris2.8 are OK as well (GCC 4.3.3, GMP 
4.2.4, MPFR 2.3.2).

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[John David Anglin]

> The platforms still needed for mpc-0.8 release testing are:
> 
> i386-unknown-freebsd (have results for mpc-0.8dev)
> 
> i686-pc-cygwin (have results for mpc-0.8dev)
> hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 (have results for mpc-0.8dev)

mpc-0.8 builds and all tests pass on:
hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20
hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00
hppa64-hp-hpux11.00
hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
hppa64-hp-hpux11.11

Builds have been installed for GCC testing.

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Kaz Kojima]

"Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target triplet,
> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.

===================
All 57 tests passed
===================

sh4-unknown-linux-gnu
gcc 4.2.4
gmp 4.2.2
mpfr 2.3.2

Regards,
	kaz

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Janus Weil]

> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target triplet,
> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.

I just tested on i386-apple-darwin10.0.0 with:

 * gcc version 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5646)
 * GMP 4.3.1
 * MPFR 2.4.1

===================
All 57 tests passed
===================

Cheers,
Janus

RE: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Weddington, Eric]

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kaveh R. Ghazi [mailto:ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu] 
> Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 10:40 AM
> To: Gerald Pfeifer; dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com; 
> dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca; David Edelsohn; Weddington, Eric
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: MPC version 0.8 released!
> 
> Wow we've gotten a lot of results, thanks everyone!  But 
> we're still missing
> a few of the GCC primary and secondary platforms for the mpc-0.8 final
> release.  Some of you provided results for the missing 
> systems either for
> the mpc-0.8dev prerelease or a previous full release.  I 
> would very much
> appreciate it if you would try out the latest package.
> 
> i686-mingw32 (have results for mpc-0.7)
> 

mpc-0.8 passed all tests on i686-mingw32:

===================
All 57 tests passed
===================

gcc.exe (GCC) 3.4.5 (mingw-vista special r3)
gmp 4.3.1
mpfr 2.4.1

Eric Weddington

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> i386-unknown-freebsd (have results for mpc-0.8dev)
> Watch gcc-testresults, my first submission of building GCC trunk with 
> mpc-0.8 (release) should appear there in a third of a day.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-11/msg00664.html

Gerald

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Dave Korn]

Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
>> "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:
>> 
>>> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me 
>>> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target 
>>> triplet, and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.

> i686-pc-cygwin 

===================
All 57 tests passed
===================

$ cygcheck -cd gcc4 gmp mpfr
Cygwin Package Information
Package              Version
gcc4                 4.3.4-1
gmp                  4.3.1-3
mpfr                 2.4.1-4


    cheers,
      DaveK

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
> The platforms still needed for mpc-0.8 release testing are:
> 
> i386-unknown-freebsd (have results for mpc-0.8dev)

Watch gcc-testresults, my first submission of building GCC trunk with 
mpc-0.8 (release) should appear there in a third of a day.

Also, after I updated the math/mpc port in FreeBSD yesterday, FreeBSD
users who remain up-to-date generally will adopt this.

Gerald

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Kaveh R. Ghazi]

> "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:
>
>> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
>> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target
>> triplet,
>> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.

Wow we've gotten a lot of results, thanks everyone!  But we're still missing
a few of the GCC primary and secondary platforms for the mpc-0.8 final
release.  Some of you provided results for the missing systems either for
the mpc-0.8dev prerelease or a previous full release.  I would very much
appreciate it if you would try out the latest package.

The platforms still needed for mpc-0.8 release testing are:

i386-unknown-freebsd (have results for mpc-0.8dev)

i686-pc-cygwin (have results for mpc-0.8dev)
hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 (have results for mpc-0.8dev)

i686-apple-darwin (have results for mpc-0.7)
powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0 (have results for mpc-0.7)
i686-mingw32 (have results for mpc-0.7)

        Thanks!
        --Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:

> If I'm building these libraries myself, I get around this by always
> configuring GMP/MPFR/MPC with --disable-shared.  But I seem to recall that
> shared libraries are mandatory for one of the other dependencies. (?)  I
> forget which one...

You can link with static versions of all the host libraries, including 
libstdc++; I added --with-host-libstdcxx to make sure that was possible.  
I'd generally recommend doing so for whichever libraries you aren't 
getting pre-installed in system directories on your system.

> I think a more general solution would be to use libtool to link cc1 et al. so
> that the magic incantation to embed the rpath is done in a portable fashion.

Linking with RPATHs is often not a good idea (there are uses for people 
building software for their own use, but distributors keep having to 
override it to avoid the RPATHs causing problems).  However, if the user 
does want an RPATH, it's a great pain to embed a relative one using 
$ORIGIN; see <http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-10/msg00257.html> for 
a suggestion on how to make that easier.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Kaveh R. Ghazi]

From: "Paolo Carlini" <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>

> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> My guess is that /usr/local/lib is in /etc/ld.so.conf, and that
>> ldconfig gets run by a cron job periodically, and that it wasn't run
>> between the time Paolo built mpc and the time he tried to use it.
>>
> Right Ian, that was it: I ran ldconfig by hand and now it works. Gosh,
> may years ago I knew everything about ldconfig, these polished distros
> are making my mind lazy ;)
>
> Paolo.

I'm glad it sounds like you got it all figured out.

FWIW, this general issue with shared libraries is noted in PR 21547 and 
applies to all library dependencies including GMP/MPFR.  It's just that most 
people have these from their distro in /usr/lib so there's no problem 
finding them.  The issue may temporarily resurface with MPC until you can 
get it automatically.

If I'm building these libraries myself, I get around this by always 
configuring GMP/MPFR/MPC with --disable-shared.  But I seem to recall that 
shared libraries are mandatory for one of the other dependencies. (?)  I 
forget which one...

I think a more general solution would be to use libtool to link cc1 et al. 
so that the magic incantation to embed the rpath is done in a portable 
fashion.

I don't know what's involved.  Any takers?

        Thanks,
        --Kaveh

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> My guess is that /usr/local/lib is in /etc/ld.so.conf, and that
> ldconfig gets run by a cron job periodically, and that it wasn't run
> between the time Paolo built mpc and the time he tried to use it.
>   
Right Ian, that was it: I ran ldconfig by hand and now it works. Gosh,
may years ago I knew everything about ldconfig, these polished distros
are making my mind lazy ;)

Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Ian Lance Taylor]

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com> writes:

> Richard Guenther wrote:
>> Hm, so what's the difference with libmpc then?
>>   
> Good, now both a C++ library and a middle-end guy are curious ;)

My guess is that /usr/local/lib is in /etc/ld.so.conf, and that
ldconfig gets run by a cron job periodically, and that it wasn't run
between the time Paolo built mpc and the time he tried to use it.

Ian

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Richard Guenther wrote:
> Hm, so what's the difference with libmpc then?
>   
Good, now both a C++ library and a middle-end guy are curious ;)

Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Richard Guenther]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com> wrote:
> Richard Guenther wrote:
>> I guess you have both lto and graphite support disabled.  Check by
>> running ldd on cc1 and lto1.
>>
> Oh, and of course lto works fine, I already did some experiments, it says:
>
>       libelf.so.0 => /usr/local/lib/libelf.so.0 (0x00007f59e5ea1000)
>
> For lto1 is exactly the same.

Hm, so what's the difference with libmpc then?

Richard.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Richard Guenther wrote:
> I guess you have both lto and graphite support disabled.  Check by
> running ldd on cc1 and lto1.
>   
Oh, and of course lto works fine, I already did some experiments, it says:

       libelf.so.0 => /usr/local/lib/libelf.so.0 (0x00007f59e5ea1000)

For lto1 is exactly the same.

Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Richard Guenther wrote:
> I guess you have both lto and graphite support disabled.  Check by
> running ldd on cc1 and lto1.
>   
Well, at configure time, the messages say both ppl an cloog are fine...

Anyway, this is for cc1:

        libcloog.so.0 => /usr/local/lib/libcloog.so.0 (0x00007f1949991000)
        libppl_c.so.2 => /usr/local/lib/libppl_c.so.2 (0x00007f1949418000)
        libppl.so.7 => /usr/local/lib/libppl.so.7 (0x00007f1949154000)

Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Richard Guenther]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 7:36 PM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com> wrote:
> Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
>> On many Linux distributions you could configure /etc/ld.so.conf to add
>> /usr/local/lib (or lib64).
>>
>> I always do that -so no need to have a LD_LIBRARY_PATH- and IIRC some
>> distributions already have that.
> Interesting.
>
> Anyway, besides my immediate needs of building a working compiler
> including all the latest library-supported features, I'm more interested
> in seeing a "pattern" in the way such libraries are configured. For
> example, I can confirm that I have libppl, libcloog, and libelf built
> normally, that is shared versions too, and installed in /usr/local/lib
> and everything works fine (I have also older system libelf, that's why a
> need to pass --with-libelf=/usr/local, nothing else). I'm still a bit
> surprised mpc requires a different treatment (fwiw, gmp and mpfr come
> with the distro and are installed in /usr/lib64)

I guess you have both lto and graphite support disabled.  Check by
running ldd on cc1 and lto1.

Richard.

> Paolo.
>
>

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> On many Linux distributions you could configure /etc/ld.so.conf to add
> /usr/local/lib (or lib64).
>
> I always do that -so no need to have a LD_LIBRARY_PATH- and IIRC some
> distributions already have that.
Interesting.

Anyway, besides my immediate needs of building a working compiler
including all the latest library-supported features, I'm more interested
in seeing a "pattern" in the way such libraries are configured. For
example, I can confirm that I have libppl, libcloog, and libelf built
normally, that is shared versions too, and installed in /usr/local/lib
and everything works fine (I have also older system libelf, that's why a
need to pass --with-libelf=/usr/local, nothing else). I'm still a bit
surprised mpc requires a different treatment (fwiw, gmp and mpfr come
with the distro and are installed in /usr/lib64)

Paolo.
 

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Basile STARYNKEVITCH]

Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> I don't think this will change anything, the shared libraries will be picked 
>> if they are present at link time.  You can configure gmp, mpfr, mpc, etc 
>> with --disable-shared in order not to build them or delete them afterwards.
>>   
> Right, ok. Indeed, your suggestion works fine. Now I have to double
> check what I did at the time for cloog, ppl, etc, because I don't
> remember having disabled shared anywhere, but anyway...


On many Linux distributions you could configure /etc/ld.so.conf to add /usr/local/lib (or lib64).

I always do that -so no need to have a LD_LIBRARY_PATH- and IIRC some distributions already have that.

Regards.


-- 
Basile STARYNKEVITCH         http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/
email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France
*** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Eric Botcazou wrote:
> I don't think this will change anything, the shared libraries will be picked 
> if they are present at link time.  You can configure gmp, mpfr, mpc, etc 
> with --disable-shared in order not to build them or delete them afterwards.
>   
Right, ok. Indeed, your suggestion works fine. Now I have to double
check what I did at the time for cloog, ppl, etc, because I don't
remember having disabled shared anywhere, but anyway...

Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Eric Botcazou]

> Should --with-mpc-lib=/usr/local also work? I do use
> --with-libelf=/usr/local for libelf (the only non-trivial configure) and
> it works fine...

I don't think this will change anything, the shared libraries will be picked 
if they are present at link time.  You can configure gmp, mpfr, mpc, etc 
with --disable-shared in order not to build them or delete them afterwards.

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Eric Botcazou wrote:
> Delete the shared library and keep only the static one.
>   
Ah, that's more interesting, thanks Eric.

Should --with-mpc-lib=/usr/local also work? I do use
--with-libelf=/usr/local for libelf (the only non-trivial configure) and
it works fine...

Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Eric Botcazou]

> Anyway, the issue is simple: I installed mpc under /usr/local and the
> configury properly recognized it and used it during the build. Then the
> latter fails when building libgcc like this:
>
> ......./trunk-build/./gcc/cc1: error while loading shared libraries:
> libmpc.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
>
> It looks like I should add /usr/local/lib to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH for mpc?
> I didn't expect that...

Delete the shared library and keep only the static one.

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

Richard Guenther wrote:
> That's expected and true for all other build dependencies as well.
>   
Humm, ok. Frankly, I'm not sure it's generally true, I should double
check, I mean, for cloog and ppl, which I also have in /usr/local, I can
build without...

Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Richard Guenther]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com> wrote:
> -- Kaveh,
>> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
>> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target triplet,
>> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.
>>
> I'm testing for the first time a complete build of the compiler itself
> with mpc, and I'm seeing something unexpected. I'm not sure if this
> discussion belongs here, probably this is only about the proper
> functioning of mpc itself, please correct me...
>
> Anyway, the issue is simple: I installed mpc under /usr/local and the
> configury properly recognized it and used it during the build. Then the
> latter fails when building libgcc like this:
>
> ......./trunk-build/./gcc/cc1: error while loading shared libraries:
> libmpc.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
>
> It looks like I should add /usr/local/lib to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH for mpc?
> I didn't expect that...

That's expected and true for all other build dependencies as well.

Richard.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Paolo Carlini]

-- Kaveh,
> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target triplet,
> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.
>   
I'm testing for the first time a complete build of the compiler itself
with mpc, and I'm seeing something unexpected. I'm not sure if this
discussion belongs here, probably this is only about the proper
functioning of mpc itself, please correct me...

Anyway, the issue is simple: I installed mpc under /usr/local and the
configury properly recognized it and used it during the build. Then the
latter fails when building libgcc like this:

......./trunk-build/./gcc/cc1: error while loading shared libraries:
libmpc.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

It looks like I should add /usr/local/lib to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH for mpc?
I didn't expect that...

Thanks,
Paolo.

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Mikael Pettersson]

Kaveh R. Ghazi writes:
 > From: "Dennis Clarke" <dclarke@blastwave.org>
 > 
 > >>> > target GCC GMP MPFR
 > >>> >
 > >>> > sparc-sun-solaris2.11 4.1.1 4.2.1 2.3.2
 > >>> > i386-pc-solaris2.10 4.1.1 4.2.1 2.3.2
 > >>> > mips-sgi-irix6.5 3.4.5 4.3.0 2.3.2
 > >>> > alpha-dec-osf4.0f 3.4.4 4.2.1 2.3.2
 > >>> >
 > >>> > All tests passed everywhere.
 > >>>
 > >>> what about sparc-sun-solaris2.10 ? sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and 2.8 ?
 > 
 > I've done sparc-sun-solaris2.9, it passed.  See:
 > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/mpc-discuss/2009-November/000608.html
 > 
 > Since sparc-sun-solaris2.10 is our official "primary platform" solaris for 
 > gcc-4.5, it would be nice to have that checked as well.
 > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/criteria.html
 > 
 > Though I don't foresee any problems, if either of you have that box and can 
 > find time to run the test and report back, I would very much appreciate it.

sparc-sun-solaris2.10, gcc-4.4.2, gmp-4.3.1, mpfr-2.4.1, mpc-0.8
All 57 tests passed

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Kaveh R. Ghazi]

From: "Dennis Clarke" <dclarke@blastwave.org>

>>> > target GCC GMP MPFR
>>> >
>>> > sparc-sun-solaris2.11 4.1.1 4.2.1 2.3.2
>>> > i386-pc-solaris2.10 4.1.1 4.2.1 2.3.2
>>> > mips-sgi-irix6.5 3.4.5 4.3.0 2.3.2
>>> > alpha-dec-osf4.0f 3.4.4 4.2.1 2.3.2
>>> >
>>> > All tests passed everywhere.
>>>
>>> what about sparc-sun-solaris2.10 ? sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and 2.8 ?

I've done sparc-sun-solaris2.9, it passed.  See:
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/mpc-discuss/2009-November/000608.html

Since sparc-sun-solaris2.10 is our official "primary platform" solaris for 
gcc-4.5, it would be nice to have that checked as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/criteria.html

Though I don't foresee any problems, if either of you have that box and can 
find time to run the test and report back, I would very much appreciate it.

        Thanks,
        --Kaveh

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Dennis Clarke]

> Dennis Clarke writes:
>
>> > "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:
>> >
>> >> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
>> >> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target
>> >> triplet,
>> >> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.
>> >
>> > target			GCC	GMP	MPFR
>> >
>> > sparc-sun-solaris2.11	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
>> > i386-pc-solaris2.10	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
>> > mips-sgi-irix6.5	3.4.5	4.3.0	2.3.2
>> > alpha-dec-osf4.0f	3.4.4	4.2.1	2.3.2
>> >
>> > All tests passed everywhere.
>>
>> what about sparc-sun-solaris2.10 ? sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and 2.8 ?
>
> I don't have Solaris 8 anymore and no Solaris 9/SPARC system appropriate
> for GCC testing.  I don't expect differences between Solaris 10 and 11
> here, and frankly, I don't have the cycles (human, not machine) to do all
> this testing, so I'm relying on user reports should unexpected problems
> occur.
>
> 	Rainer

Thank you .. I have all that equipment here. I may not have the cycles
either but at least the servers are all here. If anyone in the GCC project
has the time .. I have the facilities.

-- 
Dennis Clarke
dclarke@opensolaris.ca  <- Email related to the open source Solaris
dclarke@blastwave.org   <- Email related to open source for Solaris

Re: MPC version 0.8 released!

[Rainer Orth]

"Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:

> Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
> privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target triplet,
> and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.

target			GCC	GMP	MPFR

sparc-sun-solaris2.11	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
i386-pc-solaris2.10	4.1.1	4.2.1	2.3.2
mips-sgi-irix6.5	3.4.5	4.3.0	2.3.2
alpha-dec-osf4.0f	3.4.4	4.2.1	2.3.2

All tests passed everywhere.

	Rainer

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University

MPC version 0.8 released!

[Kaveh R. GHAZI]

MPC version 0.8 has been released:
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/mpc-discuss/2009-November/000608.html

You can download the tarball here:
http://www.multiprecision.org/index.php?prog=mpc&page=download

This release is for our purposes C99 feature-complete.  After some wider
portability testing, I will submit patches to make it mandatory for the
GCC bootstrap process.

Please test this version and report back in this thread (not to me
privately) the results of "make check".  Also include your target triplet,
and the versions of your compiler, gmp and mpfr.

		Thanks,
		--Kaveh