On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 12:20:23PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Ken Moffat wrote: > > Isn't -flto the gold linker? I'm not sure. > > Didn't someone once say that if you don't follow the book and something > breaks, that you get to keep the pieces? > > [snip]
Probably (-flto), certainly the book doesn't enable the plugins. And yes, I'm keeping all the pieces. But the failures are new since the end of May - at that time gold worked fine (barring firefox, which has now been fixed), which is why I've been keen to see it added. I'm going to start a second build without gold. > > As you know, I use jhalfs to test changes before I commit to the book. These > are all the failures I get in gcc: > > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-vpabsb256-2.c execution test > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-vpabsd256-2.c execution test > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-vpabsw256-2.c execution test > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-vpabsb256-2.c execution test > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-vpabsd256-2.c execution test > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-vpabsw256-2.c execution test > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: experimental/filesystem/iterators/directory_iterator.cc > execution test > 083-gcc-6.1.0:FAIL: > experimental/filesystem/iterators/recursive_directory_iterator.cc execution > tes > > The iterator failures are old and the avx2-vpabsb256-2.c failures are from a > single file that I have not investigated. > > I had no failures in binutils. > I didn't remember seeing any i386 failures before. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
