http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #39 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-28
04:54:28 UTC ---
*** Bug 39173 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--- Comment #38 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-07 08:39
---
*** Bug 44437 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #34 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-07 13:35 ---
Linker bug, so closing. Workaround also exists, use a non-buggy linker, or use
non-obsolete crt files.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #35 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-07 19:54
---
Seems like powerpc-*-freebsd* is now also affected.
I have the -O1 patch in testing.
The newer binutils option is a nop since FreeBSD (has to) stay(s) on binutils
2.15.
--
--- Comment #36 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-10-07 22:35
---
Andreas, there is no way this bug can be fixed 100% in gcc, except perhaps if
you are willing to compile -static. Source and/or compiler fixes only work to
the extent that they limit code+data size to less than
--- Comment #37 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-08 05:10
---
Subject: Bug 37739
Author: andreast
Date: Thu Oct 8 05:09:54 2009
New Revision: 152550
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152550
Log:
2009-10-08 Andreas Tobler a.tob...@schweiz.org
--- Comment #33 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-09-30 02:29
---
To save people looking through the binutils bug report, here's the bug
analysis:
You are using the old-style plt and got rather than the new secure plt (forced
by old startup files even if all the other code is
--- Comment #32 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:48
---
Can anyone confirm that this is fixed?
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #31 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-08-11 15:09
---
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-08/msg00163.html appears to have fixed
this issue. See http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474 for
details.
--
--- Comment #30 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-08-06 17:32
---
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474 is the bug I opened on
Binutils.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #29 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-07-26 20:28
---
STAGE1_CFLAGS=-g -O2 is a workaround, -O1 gave failure later in the build.
-O2 built GCC all the way through, with only one unexpected testsuite failure.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #27 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-24 09:46 ---
These are small helper programs. The real question is if -Wl,--relax is used
on the gcc line that actually fails with the linker errors.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #28 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-07-24 13:12
---
Looks like it.
gcc -isystem /usr/include -m32 -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual
-Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat
--- Comment #23 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-23 13:36 ---
Can you please
grep xmake_file= gcc/Makefile
in the gcc build directory as well as write what
gcc -Wl,--version
prints? Binutils 2.19 and later have the needed relax fixes I think, so
rs6000/x-linux-relax should be
--- Comment #24 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-07-23 16:50
---
root:/var/build_system/work/gcc-build# grep xmake_file= gcc/Makefile
xmake_file= $(srcdir)/config/rs6000/x-rs6000
$(srcdir)/config/rs6000/x-linux-relax $(srcdir)/config/x-linux
root:/var/build_system$ gcc
--- Comment #25 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-23 16:56 ---
Is -Wl,--relax passed to the compiler driver when linking the binary that fails
to link then? If yes, you are looking at a ld problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #26 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-07-23 18:36
---
Looks like it's being used. Any ideas?
gcc -isystem /usr/include -m32 -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual
-Wold-style-definition
--- Comment #22 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-07-22 17:21
---
Work around doesn't work.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #19 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-19 17:04
---
*** Bug 40806 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-19 19:23
---
*** Bug 40806 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-19 19:24
---
Re-open on request. A workaround exists, so certainly not P1.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from jan at codejunky dot org 2009-07-02 16:26 ---
Same problem here on powerpc-32:
powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual
-Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat
--- Comment #16 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-07-02 16:35
---
OK, so we've had several reliable reports that this bug still exists, but I'm
not high enough in the GCC bugzilla hierarchy to reopen this bug (I just
tried), perhaps Andreas or Jakub would like to do so.
--- Comment #17 from bergner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-02 16:48
---
Alan, do you have any ideas?
--
bergner at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-07-03 01:38
---
I wonder whether people reporting that this bug has not been fixed (at least
for C/C++) realize that the fix needs to be in the sources you are building.
It's not a fix that affects the installed compiler.
--- Comment #14 from acrux at linuxmail dot org 2009-06-14 09:27 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Fixed.
it seems unfixed. Unable to bootstrap gcc-4.4.0 from itself. Problems happens
only on powerpc32.
failure:
/home/varie/gcc/work/src/build/gcc/../../gcc-4.4.0/gcc/tree.h:192:
--- Comment #13 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-06-11 00:01 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Fixed.
Not quite. I'm trying to build gcc-4.4-20090609 on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu,
with binutils 2.17.50.0.6-6, configured with --enable-languages=c,ada
--with-cpu=default32
--- Comment #12 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-02-11 18:13
---
I just got the same error with
140 12:54 ../../gcc-4.3.3/configure --prefix=/pkgs/gcc-4.3.3
--enable-languages=c
141 12:54 make -j 4 bootstrap build.log
trying to build gcc-4.3.3 with
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-19 14:57 ---
Subject: Bug 37739
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Dec 19 14:55:42 2008
New Revision: 142833
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142833
Log:
PR bootstrap/37739
* config.host: For
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-19 14:59 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #9 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-15 19:35
---
Tested the patch on F10.
Results here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-12/msg01223.html
Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 10:02 ---
I think this should be P1. While a workaround (such as STAGE1_CFLAGS=-g -O1)
exists, not being able to bootstrap on a primary platform is very severe.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 11:28 ---
I tried to reproduce this but ran into a different error on powerpc-linux:
/usr/src/packages/BUILD/gcc-4.4.0-20081204/obj-powerpc64-suse-linux/./gcc/xgcc
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 16:31 ---
Testing a patch...
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 13:02 ---
*** Bug 38155 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 15:10 ---
Given that .text (with --relax) is ATM 48MB on cc1-dummy (and f951) and 52.7MB
on cc1plus-dummy (when using somewhat older 4.4 snapshot as bootstrap
compiler), I'm afraid just conditionalizing something during first
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37739
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-06 21:53 ---
The failure started with r132589
Though it pushed the code limit up on the functions inside insn-automata.o.
I wonder if we could get a way to disable and enable some scheduling for the
first stage where we only
39 matches
Mail list logo
