The problem is, this is the standard gcc in debian, :-( On 3 June 2010 18:55, Jason Moxham <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday 02 June 2010 19:13:38 Bill Hart wrote: >> On 2 June 2010 19:10, Jason Moxham <[email protected]> wrote: >> > 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? >> >> Not sure. It's not an argument to not support them. I just think it >> isn't so important at the moment if we do. >> >> >> 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++ >> >> Ah ok. >> >> >> * 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 ? >> >> Not that I know of. >> >> I guess you don't have access to FSFFrance. >> >> >> 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 >> >> Yeah I have no idea. >> > > we could kind of "fake" one up like , where we put the normal C files test > case failures > > int main(void) > { > > #ifdef _GNUC_ > #if _GCC_VERSION_MAJOR==4 && _GCC_VERSION_MINOR==3 && _GCC_VERSION_PATCH==2 > #error BAD_GCC_VERSION > #endif > #endif > return 0;} > > This would just gratuitously reject all gcc's which had this version number , > not a test as such , but it least it would not allow known bad mpir libs to be > built , and the autotools script does falls back to "cc" which may work > > This would effectively "ban gcc-4.3.2" > > >> >> 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. > > -- > 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.
