Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 09:06:56AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 06:43:23PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > The fix was as simple as this: > > Thanks!! Committed. Great! /me fires up the DS10.. -- | / o / /_ _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 06:43:23PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > The fix was as simple as this: Thanks!! Committed. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 12:02:18PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 07:08:21PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > David!
> >
> > After the latest binutils import, attempts to cross-compile
> > Alpha fail at the cross-tools stage of buildworld as shown
> > below. Please also note sed(1) complaints about nonexistent
> > ldscripts/ files. I suspect that "normal" alpha worlds may
> > be broken as well, but I can't tell for sure.
>
> I am sure it probably is. There is a lack of developers using -current
> on Alpha's that progress on i386, IA64, x86-64, and sparc64 cannot be
> held back. I will fix the Alpha problems when I get a chance, but it may
> be a week.
>
The fix was as simple as this:
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/libbfd/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -r1.16 Makefile
--- Makefile2002/01/27 22:47:22 1.16
+++ Makefile2002/02/04 16:40:01
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
.PATH: ${SRCDIR}/bfd ${SRCDIR}/opcodes
LIB= bfd
-SRCS+= archive.c archures.c bfd.c binary.c cache.c \
+SRCS+= archive.c archive64.c archures.c bfd.c binary.c cache.c \
coffgen.c corefile.c elf.c elf-eh-frame.c elf-strtab.c format.c \
hash.c ihex.c init.c libbfd.c linker.c merge.c opncls.c reloc.c \
section.c srec.c stab-syms.c stabs.c syms.c targets.c tekhex.c \
Verified with both i386 and alpha.
Cheers,
--
Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sunbay Software AG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251Simferopol, Ukraine
http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 09:07:27AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 05:24:54PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > This still *is* -CURRENT, right? If it doesn't break, once in a > > > while, how will new things be tested by the -CURRENT userbase? > > > > A "make world" before commit? Is this a trick question? > > Please see the 2001 freebsd-alpha archives were it was stated that > non-working on the Alpha would not longer be something that could hold > back toolchain upgrades. Yes, I remember. But I have to admit I would be interested to know when the toolchain for Alpha on -current will be able to buildworld again. Yesterday I put an extra disk in my DS10 to put -current on. Building a -current is 'currently' (sic.. ;-) not possible at all. Wilko -- | / o / /_ _ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 05:24:54PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > This still *is* -CURRENT, right? If it doesn't break, once in a > > while, how will new things be tested by the -CURRENT userbase? > > A "make world" before commit? Is this a trick question? Please see the 2001 freebsd-alpha archives were it was stated that non-working on the Alpha would not longer be something that could hold back toolchain upgrades. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > This still *is* -CURRENT, right? If it doesn't break, once in a > while, how will new things be tested by the -CURRENT userbase? A "make world" before commit? Is this a trick question? > Instead of whining about "you broke it, and haven't fixed it" it would > be a far better thing to contribute patches that fix the brokenness. If you insist, I can contribute patches that will back out the binutils changes. I think this is already in the process of being handled, though; you seem to be catching up on some very old email. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On 2002-01-30 23:22, Terry Lambert wrote: > Peter Wemm wrote: > > I dont suppose you actually thought to go and have a look and see what the > > problem is yourself, rather than assigning the work to somebody else? > > Nope, sorry. > > I hear the latest binutils break Alpha cross compilation. My > fix is to back out the changes locally, and not use them. > > Basically, instead of fixing the brokeness, I chose to not > break the fixedness. This still *is* -CURRENT, right? If it doesn't break, once in a while, how will new things be tested by the -CURRENT userbase? Instead of whining about "you broke it, and haven't fixed it" it would be a far better thing to contribute patches that fix the brokenness. - Giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
Peter Wemm wrote: > I dont suppose you actually thought to go and have a look and see what the > problem is yourself, rather than assigning the work to somebody else? Nope, sorry. I hear the latest binutils break Alpha cross compilation. My fix is to back out the changes locally, and not use them. Basically, instead of fixing the brokeness, I chose to not break the fixedness. My recommendation would be to revert the change until it can be imported as working code. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 07:32:29PM +0100, Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 09:13:13AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:20:39AM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > > > That's easy to say when signing up somebody else to do the work. > > > > > > Seriously though, in spite of pretending otherwise, i386 *is* our reference > > > platform, and the "other" platforms require people with the hardware and > > > interest to keep it "alive". > > ... Not to forget knowledge and time. > > > If there isn't enough critical mass to keep it going, then it is dead > > > by definition. > > > > This is my current feeling -- that Alpha 5-CURRENT no long has any > > critical mass. Thus it isn't worth the time or trouble. I'm would not call it dead only because it's always behind development. The latest alpha-current I'm running is nearly a month old - just because I always want to see a stable i386 before which I havn't seen for the last weeks. Sorry - I can't spend my time on alpha *and* machine independ bugs. > > My interests have moved over to sparc64 and x86-64 where I believe there Many alpha bugs and problems are there because of LP64 not because of alpha - other LP64 platforms will put LP64 into a much stronger position and help alpha a lot. I was always interested in FreeBSD-alpha because of having more than 4G memory and more than 4G address space - mostly the later. None is working - Memory is limited to 2G and increasing MAXDSIZ to big values is simply broken. Not ashtonishing that there is no big interest for anyoone to use FreeBSD-alpha in production - you can have these limits cheaper and without the bug troubles using Intel hardware. I always been sorrowed to run an FreeBSD-alpha as a cvsup server. > For x86-64 I see the point, sparc64 is not something I would want to spend > any time on (no disrespect to the sparc64 folks, I just don't think sparc > will have any great momentum). > > > will be a much larger following. It is shame after I've spent several > > thousand $$ on Alpha hardware over the past three years. That's what makes me still beleave in FreeBSD-alpha. Alpha is the cheapest 64 bit platform available. Think a moment on what you have paid for your sun labeled symbios. > And Alpha hardware is so much nicer than the x86 crap out there :( The same goes for sparc64 compared to x86. And sparc64 has a better future from the hardware perspective. I can understand why people are looking forward to sparc64. -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] Usergroup [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 09:13:13AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:20:39AM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > > That's easy to say when signing up somebody else to do the work. > > > > Seriously though, in spite of pretending otherwise, i386 *is* our reference > > platform, and the "other" platforms require people with the hardware and > > interest to keep it "alive". > ... > > If there isn't enough critical mass to keep it going, then it is dead > > by definition. > > This is my current feeling -- that Alpha 5-CURRENT no long has any > critical mass. Thus it isn't worth the time or trouble. > > My interests have moved over to sparc64 and x86-64 where I believe there For x86-64 I see the point, sparc64 is not something I would want to spend any time on (no disrespect to the sparc64 folks, I just don't think sparc will have any great momentum). > will be a much larger following. It is shame after I've spent several > thousand $$ on Alpha hardware over the past three years. And Alpha hardware is so much nicer than the x86 crap out there :( W/ -- | / o / /_ _ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte FreeBSD core team secretary To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:20:39AM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > That's easy to say when signing up somebody else to do the work. > > Seriously though, in spite of pretending otherwise, i386 *is* our reference > platform, and the "other" platforms require people with the hardware and > interest to keep it "alive". ... > If there isn't enough critical mass to keep it going, then it is dead > by definition. This is my current feeling -- that Alpha 5-CURRENT no long has any critical mass. Thus it isn't worth the time or trouble. My interests have moved over to sparc64 and x86-64 where I believe there will be a much larger following. It is shame after I've spent several thousand $$ on Alpha hardware over the past three years. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
Terry Lambert wrote: > David O'Brien wrote: > > > After the latest binutils import, attempts to cross-compile > > > Alpha fail at the cross-tools stage of buildworld as shown > > > below. Please also note sed(1) complaints about nonexistent > > > ldscripts/ files. I suspect that "normal" alpha worlds may > > > be broken as well, but I can't tell for sure. > > > > I am sure it probably is. There is a lack of developers using -current > > on Alpha's that progress on i386, IA64, x86-64, and sparc64 cannot be > > held back. I will fix the Alpha problems when I get a chance, but it may > > be a week. > > I know: add cross compilation for Alpha to your regression > on i386, IA84, x86-64, or sparc64, and that will catcth > things like this in the future, without you needing to have > Alpha hardware, and without you orphaning it as a result of > your changes. That's easy to say when signing up somebody else to do the work. Seriously though, in spite of pretending otherwise, i386 *is* our reference platform, and the "other" platforms require people with the hardware and interest to keep it "alive". This is the same with alpha as ia64, sparc64, powerpc, mips, x86-64 etc. If there isn't enough critical mass to keep it going, then it is dead by definition. Witness the mips port, it pretty much never made it to square one. I've done my bit over the last 6 months to keep the alpha alive (ported KSE phase 1 to alpha as well as 3 other platforms that I knew little to nothing about). I dont suppose you actually thought to go and have a look and see what the problem is yourself, rather than assigning the work to somebody else? Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 06:54:08PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > David O'Brien wrote: > > > After the latest binutils import, attempts to cross-compile > > > Alpha fail at the cross-tools stage of buildworld as shown > > > below. Please also note sed(1) complaints about nonexistent > > > ldscripts/ files. I suspect that "normal" alpha worlds may > > > be broken as well, but I can't tell for sure. > > > > I am sure it probably is. There is a lack of developers using -current > > on Alpha's that progress on i386, IA64, x86-64, and sparc64 cannot be > > held back. I will fix the Alpha problems when I get a chance, but it may > > be a week. > > I know: add cross compilation for Alpha to your regression > on i386, IA84, x86-64, or sparc64, and that will catcth > things like this in the future, without you needing to have > Alpha hardware, and without you orphaning it as a result of > your changes. Not a relevant comment I'm afraid, David has Alpha hardware ;) He helped me often enough with Alpha issues. Wilko -- | / o / /_ _ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
David O'Brien wrote: > > After the latest binutils import, attempts to cross-compile > > Alpha fail at the cross-tools stage of buildworld as shown > > below. Please also note sed(1) complaints about nonexistent > > ldscripts/ files. I suspect that "normal" alpha worlds may > > be broken as well, but I can't tell for sure. > > I am sure it probably is. There is a lack of developers using -current > on Alpha's that progress on i386, IA64, x86-64, and sparc64 cannot be > held back. I will fix the Alpha problems when I get a chance, but it may > be a week. I know: add cross compilation for Alpha to your regression on i386, IA84, x86-64, or sparc64, and that will catcth things like this in the future, without you needing to have Alpha hardware, and without you orphaning it as a result of your changes. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 07:08:21PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > David! > > After the latest binutils import, attempts to cross-compile > Alpha fail at the cross-tools stage of buildworld as shown > below. Please also note sed(1) complaints about nonexistent > ldscripts/ files. I suspect that "normal" alpha worlds may > be broken as well, but I can't tell for sure. I am sure it probably is. There is a lack of developers using -current on Alpha's that progress on i386, IA64, x86-64, and sparc64 cannot be held back. I will fix the Alpha problems when I get a chance, but it may be a week. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Latest binutils import breaks Alpha cross compiles
Ruslan Ermilov writes: > David! > > After the latest binutils import, attempts to cross-compile > Alpha fail at the cross-tools stage of buildworld as shown > below. Please also note sed(1) complaints about nonexistent > ldscripts/ files. I suspect that "normal" alpha worlds may > be broken as well, but I can't tell for sure. I can confirm that the normal alpha build is broken. It dies in the same way you described in your cross-build. Sed is also complaining about missing ldscripts/elf64alpha.xsc Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
