Bug#148651: gcc 3.1-2 patch breaks binutils builds
Package: gcc-3.1 Version: 3.1-2 In rebuilding binutils 2.12.90.0.7-1 with gcc-3.1-2 on debian ppc sid I discovered that this causes binutils to have a new unexpected failure in its testsuite... Running /home/howarth/debian-binutils/binutils-2.12.90.0.7/build-tree/binutils-2 .12.90.0.7/ld/testsuite/ld-srec/srec.exp ... PASS: S-records FAIL: S-records with constructors It appears the origin of this problem is the use of the g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch in the build of gcc-3.1. This patch is not used in the RedHat gcc 3.1 srpms. If I rebuild gcc-3.1-2 with the g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch disabled and then install that gcc-3.1-2 and rebuild binutils 2.12.90.0.7 (or 2.12.90.0.9) I find that the unexpected binutils failure has disappeared from the testsuite results. I have forwarded this information to HJ Lu so he can look into whether the use g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch breakage is due to a bug in gcc or binutils. For now unless there is a pressing reason to use it we should disable that patch. Jack -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#148651: marked as done (gcc 3.1-2 patch breaks binutils builds)
Your message dated Fri, 31 May 2002 11:03:51 -0400 (EDT) with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#148651: gcc 3.1-2 patch breaks binutils builds has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 31 May 2002 14:29:33 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri May 31 09:29:33 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from bromo.med.uc.edu (bromo.msbb.uc.edu) [129.137.3.146] by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 17DnPJ-0007bk-00; Fri, 31 May 2002 09:29:33 -0500 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by bromo.msbb.uc.edu (SGI-8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA75191 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 31 May 2002 10:28:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 10:28:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Jack Howarth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: gcc 3.1-2 patch breaks binutils builds Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package: gcc-3.1 Version: 3.1-2 In rebuilding binutils 2.12.90.0.7-1 with gcc-3.1-2 on debian ppc sid I discovered that this causes binutils to have a new unexpected failure in its testsuite... Running /home/howarth/debian-binutils/binutils-2.12.90.0.7/build-tree/binutils-2 .12.90.0.7/ld/testsuite/ld-srec/srec.exp ... PASS: S-records FAIL: S-records with constructors It appears the origin of this problem is the use of the g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch in the build of gcc-3.1. This patch is not used in the RedHat gcc 3.1 srpms. If I rebuild gcc-3.1-2 with the g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch disabled and then install that gcc-3.1-2 and rebuild binutils 2.12.90.0.7 (or 2.12.90.0.9) I find that the unexpected binutils failure has disappeared from the testsuite results. I have forwarded this information to HJ Lu so he can look into whether the use g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch breakage is due to a bug in gcc or binutils. For now unless there is a pressing reason to use it we should disable that patch. Jack --- Received: (at 148651-done) by bugs.debian.org; 31 May 2002 15:04:03 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri May 31 10:04:03 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from dsl092-073-086.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (spawn.hockeyfiend.com) [66.92.73.86] (mail) by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 17Dnwh-0002bD-00; Fri, 31 May 2002 10:04:03 -0500 Received: from chris (helo=localhost) by spawn.hockeyfiend.com with local-esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17DnwW-0005tH-00; Fri, 31 May 2002 11:03:52 -0400 Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 11:03:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher C. Chimelis [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jack Howarth [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Debian GCC maintainers debian-gcc@lists.debian.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#148651: gcc 3.1-2 patch breaks binutils builds In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: Christopher C. Chimelis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, 31 May 2002, Jack Howarth wrote: Package: gcc-3.1 Version: 3.1-2 In rebuilding binutils 2.12.90.0.7-1 with gcc-3.1-2 on debian ppc sid I discovered that this causes binutils to have a new unexpected failure in its testsuite... Running /home/howarth/debian-binutils/binutils-2.12.90.0.7/build-tree/binutils-2 .12.90.0.7/ld/testsuite/ld-srec/srec.exp ... PASS: S-records FAIL: S-records with constructors It appears the origin of this problem is the use of the g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch in the build of gcc-3.1. This patch is not used in the RedHat gcc 3.1 srpms. If I rebuild gcc-3.1-2 with the g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch disabled and then install that gcc-3.1-2 and rebuild binutils 2.12.90.0.7 (or 2.12.90.0.9) I find that the unexpected binutils failure has disappeared from the testsuite results. I have forwarded this information to HJ Lu so he can look into whether the use g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch breakage is due to a bug in gcc or binutils. For now unless there is a pressing reason to use it we should disable that patch. Whoa! This is not a breakage nor have I confirmed that it is a real failure of the test at all. It just appears that the flags passed to the linker are insufficient for this test given the atexit patch. It is VERY likely that this test will still pass, given that ld links the test binary against the proper libraries, but the test as written upstream
Bug#148662: gcj-3.1 used wrong libgcj
Package: gcj-3.1 Version: 1:3.1-2 Severity: normal I tried to use gcj-3.1 to compile an app I'm helping with development. Unfortunately an old libgcj2 from gcj-3.0 was installed. gcj-3.1 used this version of libgcj installed of the version of libgcj3, which was intalled too. IMO gcj-3.1 should replace gcj-3.0 and depend on libgcj3. libgcj3 should replace libgcj2. A second problem is that ant can only use gcj as executable name, not gcj-3.1 IMO should provide a symlink from /usr/bin/gcj to /usr/bin/gcj-3.1 -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux asterix 2.4.18-k7 #1 Sun Apr 14 13:19:11 EST 2002 i686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ignored: LC_ALL set) Versions of packages gcj-3.1 depends on: ii gcc-3.1 1:3.1-2The GNU C compiler. ii gcc-3.1-base 1:3.1-2The GNU Compiler Collection (base ii java-common 0.14 Base of all Java packages ii libc6 2.2.5-6GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libgcc1 1:3.1-2GCC support library. ii libgcj3 1:3.1-2Java runtime library for use with ii libgcj3-dev 1:3.1-2Java development headers and stati ii zlib1g1:1.1.4-1 compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#148664: g++-3.1: can not compile code with std::assert in it
Package: g++-3.1 Version: 1:3.1-2 Severity: normal in modern C++ the style is: #include cassert std::assert(this_should_be_true); however this fails to compile under 3.1 claiming: parse error before `static_cast' my code is not casting. The cast is coming from assert.h provided by glibc. This may indeed be a glibc bug, if so feel free to reassign it. For now I can work around this by using the C header assert.h which causes assert.h to be interpreted as C, not C++ code. -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux one 2.4.18 #1 Sat Mar 9 08:43:28 PST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (ignored: LC_ALL set) Versions of packages g++-3.1 depends on: ii gcc-3.1 1:3.1-2The GNU C compiler. ii gcc-3.1-base 1:3.1-2The GNU Compiler Collection (base ii libc6 2.2.5-6GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libstdc++4-dev1:3.1-2The GNU stdc++ library version 3 ( -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
xmmintrin.h, _MM_TRANSPOSE4_PS is broken
Submitter-Id: net
Originator:Stephen Kennedy
Organization:
Confidential: no
Synopsis: xmmintrin.h, _MM_TRANSPOSE4_PS is broken
Severity: serious
Priority: medium
Category: c
Class: sw-bug
Release: 3.1 (Debian) (Debian testing/unstable)
Environment:
System: Linux stag 2.4.17-686sk #1 Fri Feb 15 18:08:06 GMT 2002 i686 unknown
Architecture: i686
host: i386-pc-linux-gnu
build: i386-pc-linux-gnu
target: i386-pc-linux-gnu
configured with: /mnt/data/gcc-3.1/gcc-3.1-3.1ds2/src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,proto,objc,ada --prefix=/usr
--mandir=$\(prefix\)/share/man --infodir=$\(prefix\)/share/info
--with-gxx-include-dir=$\(prefix\)/include/g++-v3-3.1 --enable-shared
--with-system-zlib --enable-long-long --enable-nls --without-included-gettext
--enable-clocale=gnu --enable-threads=posix --enable-java-gc=boehm
--enable-objc-gc i386-linux
Description:
the code in _MM_TRANSPOSE4_PS is incorrect.
How-To-Repeat:
n/a
Fix:
Apply the following patch
--- xmmintrin.h.old Fri May 31 18:43:57 2002
+++ xmmintrin.h Fri May 31 18:31:55 2002
@@ -1049,8 +1049,8 @@
do { \
__v4sf __r0 = (row0), __r1 = (row1), __r2 = (row2), __r3 = (row3); \
__v4sf __t0 = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__r0, __r1, 0x44); \
- __v4sf __t1 = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__r0, __r1, 0xEE); \
- __v4sf __t2 = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__r2, __r3, 0x44); \
+ __v4sf __t2 = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__r0, __r1, 0xEE); \
+ __v4sf __t1 = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__r2, __r3, 0x44); \
__v4sf __t3 = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__r2, __r3, 0xEE); \
(row0) = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__t0, __t1, 0x88); \
(row1) = __builtin_ia32_shufps (__t0, __t1, 0xDD); \
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#148676: libgcj3: File duplicate
Package: libgcj3 Version: 1:3.1-2 Severity: normal libgcj3 includes the file called: /usr/lib/security/classpath.security Unfortunately the package classpath includes the same file. Either libgcj3 shouldn't include this file or both packages should forbid the other. -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux asterix 2.4.18-k7 #1 Sun Apr 14 13:19:11 EST 2002 i686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ignored: LC_ALL set) Versions of packages libgcj3 depends on: ii libc6 2.2.5-6GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libgcc1 1:3.1-2GCC support library. ii zlib1g1:1.1.4-1 compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#148682: gij-3.1: /usr/bin/gij-wrapper-3.1 tries to execute wrong gij
Package: gij-3.1 Version: 1:3.1-2 Severity: normal gij-3.1 contains the file /usr/bin/gij-wrapper-3.1. This file tries to execute the file /usr/bin/gij-3.0 which is part of gij-3.0. It should execute /usr/bin/gij-3.1 -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux asterix 2.4.18-k7 #1 Sun Apr 14 13:19:11 EST 2002 i686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ignored: LC_ALL set) Versions of packages gij-3.1 depends on: ii gcc-3.1-base 1:3.1-2The GNU Compiler Collection (base ii libc6 2.2.5-6GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libgcc1 1:3.1-2GCC support library. ii libgcj3 1:3.1-2Java runtime library for use with ii zlib1g1:1.1.4-1 compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#148686: gcj-3.1 should provide /etc/alternatives/javac
Package: gcj-3.1 Version: 1:3.1-2 Severity: normal gcj-3.1 should provide /etc/alternatives/javac -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux asterix 2.4.18-k7 #1 Sun Apr 14 13:19:11 EST 2002 i686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ignored: LC_ALL set) Versions of packages gcj-3.1 depends on: ii gcc-3.1 1:3.1-2The GNU C compiler. ii gcc-3.1-base 1:3.1-2The GNU Compiler Collection (base ii java-common 0.14 Base of all Java packages ii libc6 2.2.5-6GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libgcc1 1:3.1-2GCC support library. ii libgcj3 1:3.1-2Java runtime library for use with ii libgcj3-dev 1:3.1-2Java development headers and stati ii zlib1g1:1.1.4-1 compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: retitle and tag some of the alpha gcc bugs as fixed in 3.0/3.1
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: retitle 70743 [fixed in gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1] [alpha] g++ -O2 optimization error Bug#70743: [alpha] g++ -O2 optimization error Changed Bug title. retitle 142844 [fixed in gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1] [alpha] dead code removal in switch() broken Bug#142844: [alpha] dead code removal in switch() broken Changed Bug title. tags 70743 + fixed Bug#70743: [fixed in gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1] [alpha] g++ -O2 optimization error Tags added: fixed tags 142844 + fixed Bug#142844: [fixed in gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1] [alpha] dead code removal in switch() broken Tags added: fixed thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#134197: gcc-2.95: gcc 2.95.4 cannot compile a bootable 2.4.17 kernel on some Alpha machines
As a short followup, I've had reports that the DAC960 driver compiles correctly with gcc-3.0 and one report that 3.1 works as well. I've heard mostly rumours that other known kernel driver miscompilation problems are also fixed in gcc 3.x. Unfortunately, I do not have a DAC960 nor any of the other hardware to be able to test the problematic driver code out to see if the drivers are compiled properly. Also, for the record, I haven't built a kernel and booted it with the Debian gcc 3.0 or 3.1 packages yet, so I'm not sure if the rest of the kernel is compiled correctly enough to be able to rely on either of those gcc versions. I have already added this test to my 'to-do' list, though, so I'm hoping to try this out soon. C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#134197: gcc-2.95: gcc 2.95.4 cannot compile a bootable 2.4.17 kernel on some Alpha machines (fwd)
As a short followup, I've had reports that the DAC960 driver compiles correctly with gcc-3.0 and one report that 3.1 works as well. I've heard mostly rumours that other known kernel driver miscompilation problems are also fixed in gcc 3.x. Unfortunately, I do not have a DAC960 nor any of the other hardware to be able to test the problematic driver code out to see if the drivers are compiled properly. Also, for the record, I haven't built a kernel and booted it with the Debian gcc 3.0 or 3.1 packages yet, so I'm not sure if the rest of the kernel is compiled correctly enough to be able to rely on either of those gcc versions. I have already added this test to my 'to-do' list, though, so I'm hoping to try this out soon. C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#141213: marked as done (g++-3.0: coredump with dynamic_cast)
Your message dated Sat, 1 Jun 2002 01:19:54 +0200 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line closing gcc-3.0 report has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 4 Apr 2002 21:28:53 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Apr 04 15:28:53 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from aragorn.ics.muni.cz [147.251.4.33] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 16tEmp-0002Pb-00; Thu, 04 Apr 2002 15:28:51 -0600 Received: from anxur.fi.muni.cz ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [147.251.48.3]) by aragorn.ics.muni.cz (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA13639 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 23:28:49 +0200 (MEST) Received: from dual.fi.muni.cz (dual.fi.muni.cz [147.251.50.170]) by anxur.fi.muni.cz (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA20499; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 23:28:49 +0200 (MEST) Received: from kabi by dual.fi.muni.cz with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16tEmn-0001VE-00; Thu, 04 Apr 2002 23:28:49 +0200 From: Zdenek Kabelac [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: g++-3.0: coredump with dynamic_cast X-Mailer: reportbug 1.49 Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 23:28:49 +0200 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Zdenek Kabelac [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package: g++-3.0 Version: 1:3.0.4-6 Severity: normal Hi Just today I've recompiled avifile with latest gcc3.0 and with Qt compiled with gcc3.0 so I could actually try how this works - and I've discovered that dynamic_cast with this gcc no longer works and actually creates coredump. For avifile I've removed usage of dynamic_cast with introduction of another method - however I believe that this bug is relatively improtant for C++ support (at least from my point of view) -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux dual 2.4.19pre1 #1 SMP Èt úno 28 21:55:47 CET 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=cs_CZ, LC_CTYPE=cs_CZ Versions of packages g++-3.0 depends on: ii gcc-3.0 1:3.0.4-6 The GNU C compiler. ii gcc-3.0-base 1:3.0.4-6 The GNU Compiler Collection (base ii libc6 2.2.5-4GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libstdc++3-dev1:3.0.4-6 The GNU stdc++ library version 3 ( --- Received: (at 141213-done) by bugs.debian.org; 31 May 2002 23:22:28 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri May 31 18:22:28 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] (root) by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 17Dvj1-0002xP-00; Fri, 31 May 2002 18:22:27 -0500 Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.19.1]) by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA22432 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sat, 1 Jun 2002 01:19:55 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id g4VNJtg03424; Sat, 1 Jun 2002 01:19:55 +0200 (MEST) From: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 01:19:54 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: closing gcc-3.0 report X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) Common Lisp XEmacs Lucid Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] closing this report. please make sure to compile all files/libs with the same g++ compiler (don't mix g++-2.95 and g++-3.[01]). Please feel free to reopen the report in the case this doesn't help. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cannot open crt1.o
Dear all,
I wrote some lines of codes like the following to verify if my gcc
could work.
int main()
{
int a,b;
a=a+1;
b=a+2;
return 0;
}
Then I typed gcc-3.1 t2.c in and it said /usr/bin/ld:Can't open
crt1.o:no such file or directory...
when I make another file,
#include stdio.h
int main()
{
printf(Hi\n);
return 0;
}
when I compiled it,it told me many
errors,../usr/lib/gcc-lib/mipsel-linux/3/1/include/stdio.h:555:parse error
before __THROW t.c:2:syntax error befor int
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
