In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Terry Lambert writes:
: If cross-compilation actually worked, the people causing
: the problems for the Alpha would be able to test the
: build, with only their x86 hardware.
I think that's why you are seeing so many people trying to make it
work :-)
Warner
To
Absolutely. People *are* working on getting that fixed.
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Terry Lambert wrote:
Matthew Jacob wrote:
Yes, I've actually been massaging a few of those- glad somebody's on
it. I'll come on out to Concord if you you need a hand It's
sometimes hard to keep -current
On 8 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Mark Peek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It probably works since i386 and pc98 are similar. I'm trying an alpha
cross build as we speak. So far I needed to apply this patch to get
around having -mcpu=ev4 being fed to the i386 compiler during the
Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 8 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
My -DNOPERL build broke in games/fortune in the building everything
phase because the Alpha compiler tried to use the i386 strfile.o that
was left over from the bootstrap phase.
This shouldn't happen. The
Matthew Jacob wrote:
Yes, I've actually been massaging a few of those- glad somebody's on
it. I'll come on out to Concord if you you need a hand It's
sometimes hard to keep -current up on an alpha long enough for a
complete buildworld
If cross-compilation actually worked, the
Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386]
I just had a major doh moment...
# cd /usr/src
# make MACHINE_ARCH=alpha buildworld /var/log/world.alpha
[1] 13655
Ought to catch any Alpha WARNS fuckups. Or did I overlook something?
DES
--
Dag-Erling
On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:03:26PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386]
I just had a major doh moment...
# cd /usr/src
# make MACHINE_ARCH=alpha buildworld /var/log/world.alpha
[1] 13655
Ought to
[cc's trimed]
In message p05100311b76e6e2b4960@[207.76.207.129] Mark Peek writes:
: It probably works since i386 and pc98 are similar. I'm trying an
: alpha cross build as we speak. So far I needed to apply this patch to
: get around having -mcpu=ev4 being fed to the i386 compiler during the
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:02:28PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Fri, Jul
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] David O'Brien writes:
: On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:03:26PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
: Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: [explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386]
:
: I just had a major doh moment...
:
: # cd /usr/src
: # make
At 1:49 PM -0600 7/8/01, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] David O'Brien writes:
: On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:03:26PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
: Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: [explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386]
:
: I just had a major doh moment...
Mark Peek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It probably works since i386 and pc98 are similar. I'm trying an alpha
cross build as we speak. So far I needed to apply this patch to get
around having -mcpu=ev4 being fed to the i386 compiler during the
build tools phase.
My -DNOPERL build broke in
On 8 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OR build a 64-bit long (LP64) x86 gcc and test compile with that also.
BDE found *lots* of 64-bit dirty code using this technique.
Mind revealing how that's done?
Compiling [g]cc with -DLONG_TYPE_SIZE=64
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
i386 type Alpha type
clock_t unsigned long int
We could make these the same (not sure why they aren't).
ptrdiff_t int long
size_tunsigned intunsigned long
ssize_t
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 04:37:43PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On i386, 'gcc -fsyntax-only -Wall x.c' produces no error. On
NetBSD/alpha (same compiler, really), this produces:
x.c: In function `func':
x.c:4: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size
It'd be *really* nice if
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 07:40:59AM -0700, Mark Peek wrote:
I had the same idea last night. I modified my PowerPC cross-compiler
port to produce an Alpha version. This is based on the lang/gcc295
port so it contains the FreeBSD patches for things like -Wformat. For
sake of example, I only
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
i386 type Alpha type
clock_t unsigned long int
We could make these the same (not sure why they aren't).
because on alpha long == 64 bits
ptrdiff_t
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
i386 type Alpha type
clock_t unsigned long int
We could make these the same (not
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
i386 type Alpha type
clock_t unsigned long
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:02:28PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
I don't know what clock_t is used for (kernel version of time_t?).
But the general agreement was to leave time as a 32-bit value on the
Alpha in order to match (1) FreeBSD/i386 and (2) OSF/1,Digital Unix,Tru64.
okay, okay, end the thread...
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 06:59:27PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
People are making more and more mistakes that break the Alpha build.
We will soon have two more arches.
...which won't really make much difference, as 99% of the difference
in
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 07:13:20PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Yes, people need to be more careful when enabling WARNS and not do it
until they've positively tested it on alpha.
OR build a 64-bit long (LP64) x86 gcc and test compile with that also.
BDE found *lots* of 64-bit dirty code using
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], David O'Brien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know what clock_t is used for (kernel version of time_t?).
It was invented by the ANSI/ISO C committee to represent CPU time.
Hardly anything uses it.
John
--
John Polstra
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OR build a 64-bit long (LP64) x86 gcc and test compile with that also.
BDE found *lots* of 64-bit dirty code using this technique.
Mind revealing how that's done?
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
On 2001-Jul-05 22:22:11 -0700, Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, the problem splits into two categories:
Firstly, sizeof(long) (and sizeof(void *)) differ between the Alpha
and the i386.
Yes. This tends to be caught by the alpha compiler but the i386.
It'd be nice if there were
On i386, 'gcc -fsyntax-only -Wall x.c' produces no error. On
NetBSD/alpha (same compiler, really), this produces:
x.c: In function `func':
x.c:4: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size
It'd be *really* nice if we could add a flag where such errors could be
checked for
At 4:37 PM +1000 7/6/01, Peter Jeremy wrote:
Another random thought: If it was easier to build/install a
cross-platform version of gcc, it might be easier to convince
developers to at least check that compiling on different platforms
works before committing.
Peter,
I had the same idea last
Yes!
On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Mark Peek wrote:
At 4:37 PM +1000 7/6/01, Peter Jeremy wrote:
Another random thought: If it was easier to build/install a
cross-platform version of gcc, it might be easier to convince
developers to at least check that compiling on different platforms
works
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
People are making more and more mistakes that break the Alpha build.
We will soon have two more arches.
...which won't really make much difference, as 99% of the difference
in userland code is integer and pointer sizes, so for all practical
purposes
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:12:22AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
This kind of language isn't called for. People make mistakes, and
insulting them for it serves no useful purpose.
People are making more and more mistakes that break the Alpha build.
We will soon have two more arches. We need to
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 05:49:56PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:12:22AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
This kind of language isn't called for. People make mistakes, and
insulting them for it serves no useful purpose.
People are making more and more mistakes that
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 09:41:21PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
Did you read my other mails? I doesn't appear that you have. Or you
didn't understand them. I was laughing because, yes, WARNS was turned on
prematurely which killed things.
Well, your email didn't translate well, because it came
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 09:41:21PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
Did you read my other mails? I doesn't appear that you have. Or you
didn't understand them. I was laughing because, yes, WARNS was turned on
prematurely which killed things.
On 2001-Jul-05 20:31:43 -0700, Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps what we really need- and this is really a toolchain issues- is a
compiler that is just as stringent on i386 as on alpha?
IMHO, the compiler _is_ just as stringent on i386 as Alpha (it's the
same compiler). IMHO, the
On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2001-Jul-05 20:31:43 -0700, Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps what we really need- and this is really a toolchain issues- is a
compiler that is just as stringent on i386 as on alpha?
IMHO, the compiler _is_ just as stringent on i386
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:00:09AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
it's just the same old same old refrain of beast is broken or
oh well, etc. etc. etc but yer right, insulting does no
good.
I beg too much hard cider at dinner. It makes
David claimed he would upgrade beast at some point- but he's pretty
busy.
1. If I had the authority to do so, I'd drive over to Concord and do it.
I can do that next week some time.
2. If I had 144KBit DSL, I'd pay the extra power bills and leave up a
PC164 at Feral all the time for people to
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently.
- Jordan
From: Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
David claimed he would upgrade
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently.
What problems? There shouldn't be any fatalities from warnings unless
people have marked something with
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 02:17:51PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
David claimed he would upgrade beast at some point- but he's pretty
busy.
Acutally out of the state on a WRS forced vacation. :-(
1. If I had the authority to do so, I'd drive over to Concord and do it.
I can do that next week
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 08:53:59AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Not normal, except by dimwits who add WARNS?= 2 w/o checking.
Now, would it really have been so hard to just send (or even commit) a
patch that declares len as a size_t rather than an unsigned int,
instead of calling
Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:22:27 -0700
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal
On 05-Jul-01 Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently.
What problems? There shouldn't be any fatalities from warnings
On 06-Jul-01 Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Well, unless implicit pointer-to-int conversions have suddenly become
fatal, it blew up on something that just got fixed (I went to commit
the fix and found that someone else had already done so in the last 12
hours). The world build has been restarted and
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 06-Jul-01 Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Well, unless implicit pointer-to-int conversions have suddenly become
fatal, it blew up on something that just got fixed (I went to commit
the fix and found that someone else had already done so in the last 12
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 06:00:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
On 05-Jul-01 Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently.
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 06:54:45PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote:
Matt Jacob usually steps in and fixes breakages on the alpha. At the minimum,
people should be either testing the build on all archs, or asking for someone
else to review the patch on archs they don't have available (this last
On 06-Jul-01 Dima Dorfman wrote:
In the WARNS= case, another
workable method would be to commit the warning fixes but don't commit the
actual WARNS= change until the build has been verified on all archs.
This doesn't work. The point of WARNS, as I see it anyway, is not to
scrub the tree
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 05:38:31PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
What is so hard with ``make -m /home/kris/mk''?
That's actually not one of the hoops you need to jump through on beast
-- I think I got someone to install the new mk files already. The
main hoops are related to stale /usr/include
working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently.
- Jordan
From: Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
David claimed he would upgrade beast at some point
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently.
What problems? There shouldn't be any fatalities from
Perhaps what we really need- and this is really a toolchain issues- is a
compiler that is just as stringent on i386 as on alpha?
I dunno- there used to be a flag to lint that would worn about
non-portable size casts. Is there a gcc flag that would cover most
of the heavy lifting for this on
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 08:07:40PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to
be worked out since warnings were made fatal
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 08:07:40PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues
I have to laugh. Sorry if you don't that helps. S'long then. I've no
more time for the likes of you.
*rolls eyes* Man, some people are hard to work in a team with.
You guys are still trying to pass this off as a team??
*boggle*
gh
(Yeah yeah, unproductive..but what part of this thread
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, GH wrote:
I have to laugh. Sorry if you don't that helps. S'long then. I've no
more time for the likes of you.
*rolls eyes* Man, some people are hard to work in a team with.
You guys are still trying to pass this off as a team??
*boggle*
gh
(Yeah yeah,
Actually, the growing realization (at least to me) that the problem
probably cannot be solved except via software tools, unless the FreeBSD
community gets more like the NetBSD community in terms of awareness-
which can only happen if it happens.
I don't know how you feel about it, but I
On 4 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Too much frickin' ergot in yer wheaties, bucko.
There is no -Wall or -Werror in normal /usr/src builds. Try again.
Sorry- let me modify that.
Not normal, except by dimwits who add WARNS?= 2
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 09:34:10PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
S are on for is the kernel- and even that isn't -Werror.
You're about two months out of date; we started locking down userland
code around that timeframe. This one probably wasn't tested
thoroughly enough on
There is no -Wall or -Werror in normal /usr/src builds. Try again.
Sorry- let me modify that.
Not normal, except by dimwits who add WARNS?= 2 w/o checking.
This kind of language isn't called for. People make mistakes, and
insulting them for it serves no useful purpose.
yah,
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 09:54:50AM +0200, some SMTP stream spewed forth:
Gentlemen,
Please? I will happily supply you with ample quantities of quality
Dutch mud to sling at one another. But please do so in private?
But think of the money we'll save on wrestling tickets.
gh
tnx
Wilko
Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is, in my mailbox, a grotesque and unforgiveable insult from you
from some months back. You deserve no respect whatsoever.
Heh. You're so cute.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
Oh- btw- let's change the tenor of this slightly:
I apologize to Dag-Erling for calling him a dimwit.
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Matthew Jacob wrote:
On 4 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Too much frickin' ergot in yer wheaties, bucko.
On 4 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is, in my mailbox, a grotesque and unforgiveable insult from you
from some months back. You deserve no respect whatsoever.
Heh. You're so cute.
*smooch* to you too, sweetie!
To Unsubscribe:
Gentlemen,
Please? I will happily supply you with ample quantities of quality
Dutch mud to sling at one another. But please do so in private?
tnx
Wilko
Matthew Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is, in my mailbox, a grotesque and unforgiveable insult from you
from some months back. You
The current version go chkgrp does not compile under alpha systems
grep FreeBSD chkgrp.c
$FreeBSD: src/usr.sbin/chkgrp/chkgrp.c,v 1.5 2001/06/24 12:38:28 des Exp
$;
=== usr.sbin/chkgrp
cc -nostdinc -O -pipe -mcpu=ev4 -mcpu=ev4
-I/usr/obj/usr/src/alpha/usr/include -W -Wall
Hmm. Somebody must have cranked some C compilation up enough to turn
warnings into errors.
If I check out chkgrp into /tmp now on a system that's currently trying
to update itself, I get:
yorp.feral.com make
Warning: Object directory not changed from original
/tmp/src/usr.sbin/chkgrp
cc -O
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 02:41:33PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
Hmm. Somebody must have cranked some C compilation up enough to turn
warnings into errors.
If I check out chkgrp into /tmp now on a system that's currently trying
to update itself, I get:
yorp.feral.com make
Warning:
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 02:41:33PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
Hmm. Somebody must have cranked some C compilation up enough to turn
warnings into errors.
If I check out chkgrp into /tmp now on a system that's currently trying
to update
S are on for is the kernel- and even that isn't -Werror.
You're about two months out of date; we started locking down userland
code around that timeframe. This one probably wasn't tested
thoroughly enough on alpha.
Too much frickin' ergot in yer wheaties, bucko.
There is no
71 matches
Mail list logo
