On 06/05/2016 17:11, Douglas R. Reno wrote:
On May 6, 2016 9:43 AM, "Pierre Labastie" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> It looks like GCC 6 adds a level of rigor to C/C++ compiling, and
that code which used to work, does not anymore because it relied on
not rigorously defined behavior.
>
> I guess this is the case for a lot of packages in BLFS. I already
have found (sorry if some of these have been mentionned already, I do
not have a way to search the mail archives ATM):
> harbuzz: may be built with: CC="gcc -std=c99" CXX="g++ -std=c++98"
./configure...
> php: may be built with: CC="gcc -std=c99" ./configure...
> libsoup: same
> xorg-evdev-driver: same
> libdrm: same
> gstreamer: same
> gstreamer-plgins-base: same (not tried the other plugins, but I
guess they need the same)
> openjdk: fix not ready yet
Were these on an LFS system upgraded to GCC6 or on a fresh build? On
my fresh builds, I haven't noticed issues with any of the above
(except PHP and OpenJDK, which I haven't built). But that does not
mean that they don't exist. Should I upgrade one of my 5.x PCs to 6.x
and try compiling my stuff on there?
YIt is on an LFS-7.9 system (so built with gcc-5) and gcc-6 installed as
per BLFS book instructions. You are right that it may make a difference.
I am currently building LFS-SVN-20160503 to have a cleaner system.
>
> Shouldn't we add an entities &gcc6-tested, &gcc6-built and add those
to the package descriptions when tested?
>
I agree that its a good idea.
Agreed with Bruce that only one entity would be enough. As of the future
version, I do not really care. If making a major version change, we
could take the opportunity to add some new features (gold, ISL...).
GCC6's configure sends warnings about ISL missing.
Pierre
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
