https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|toolch...@freebsd.org |ger...@freebsd.org
--- Comment
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
--- Comment #13 from Mikael Urankar ---
(In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #10)
I'll be able to test it in early january.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #221046|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
--- Comment #11 from Mark Millard ---
(In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #9)
I'm aware of the tradeoffs with using BOOTSTRAP off.
But my time preferences are such that on small arm boards and the like I
normally use BOOTSTRAP off:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|New |In Progress
--
You are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #219435|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
--- Comment #9 from Gerald Pfeifer ---
(In reply to Mark Millard from comment #8)
> My guess is that my options made the difference
> [...]
>BOOTSTRAP : off
>GRAPHITE : off
BOOTSTRAP=off means that GCC never
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
Mark Millard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marklmi26-f...@yahoo.com
---
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
--- Comment #7 from Gerald Pfeifer ---
I believe this is fundamentally wrong both in principle (mixing C++
standards) and in not working via upstream, but having not been able
to push the latter myself and this being contained, please go
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
Mikael Urankar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||246700
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
--- Comment #6 from Mark Linimon ---
I can confirm gcc10 builds on aarch64 under qemu using this patch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Urankar ---
(In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #4)
I haven't tried an earlier FreeBSD version
llvm8, llvm90, llvm10 and llvm10 all fail the same way.
with gcc9, it's only a warning:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250932
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ger...@freebsd.org |toolch...@freebsd.org
13 matches
Mail list logo
