On Wednesday 02 June 2010 18:23:31 Bill Hart wrote: > Two comments: > > * Fat builds don't need to work on many systems. We only support x86 > and x86_64 and basically people only need to be able to find one linux > machine with a working gcc to make one. >
True , but isn't the object format different for the bsd/mac ? , perhaps not? > Q. Is that the difference between check and test, i.e. one is a fat > build and the other is a source build? > One is a simple ./configure make make check make tune and the other is 4 to 16 combinations of options ie C,fat,gcc,cc,icc,c++ > * I've never tried dropping the optimisation on gcc 4.3.2 to see if > the problem goes away. do we have gcc-4.3.2 on skynet ? > We could do that for that one version of gcc > perhaps? > not sure how to drop the O level for one specific version of gcc without a small test case > Bill. > > On 2 June 2010 17:45, Jason Moxham <[email protected]> wrote: > > Looks good , there are only 2 or 3 real errors > > > > your cleo and iras errors are because you need to get icc in your path , > > you will hit 1 real error then , but we can easily fix that. > > > > for lena and flavius gcc34 doesn't have a g++ > > > > gcc54 has a broken c++ > > > > gcc42 has a broken c++ and there is no way to get a timer for tuning > > (same for cato) > > > > fulvia gcc4.5.0 is not installed right > > > > fulvia cc , 1 real error , suns assembler is old , we should force it to > > use yasm is all cases , I see if I can do it (I have to remove my brain > > first , to get in the autotools mood) , but it may have to wait for next > > release. > > > > bsd.math we dont support fat builds on a mac (PIC code is different) and > > they arn't needed that much > > > > gcc101 is a bsd system and I think we dont support fat builds (same as > > above?) so possibly a real error > > > > rest of the machines use gcc-4.3.2 which is broken > > > > I have updated the test script to reflect some of changes , but there are > > a lot of broken systems , so we will still get some errors from these. > > > > Jason > > > > On Wednesday 02 June 2010 16:47:22 Minh Nguyen wrote: > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> Build and test results for MPIR 2.1.0-rc2 on the build farm are > >> available at > >> > >> http://wiki.sagemath.org/mpir/BuildFarm/mpir-2.1.0#MPIR2.1.0-rc2 > >> > >> Each build was done using one thread, i.e. first exporting > >> > >> $ export MAKE='make' > >> > >> The test suite was ran using one CPU. On some machines, doing a > >> parallel build would result in a failure to tune, i.e. doing > >> > >> $ make tune > >> > >> after a parallel build would fail. So for each reported machine, I > >> only used one thread/CPU for build, check, tune, and test suite. > >> > >> -- > >> Regards > >> Minh Van Nguyen > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to > > [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email > > to [email protected]. For more options, visit this > > group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
