On 01/28/13 16:07, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
But still curious if you've been able to reproduce the problem,
and why you didn't encounter this problem beforehand.
As I mentioned before, because of
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
But why didn't the RPATH_ENVVAR=LD_LIBRARY_PATH break for you when libatomic
is configured (in stage3) for ppc64 because of this workflow I can see there:
1: gcc/xgcc is linked by prev-gcc/xg++
On 01/30/2013 03:16 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
4: Also, LD_LIBRARY_PATH points to ppc64/libstdc++-v3/.libs/ while using
32bit gcc/xgcc to build libatomic.a.
= This is the one that /does/ break, as that 64bit libstdc++.a is there now.
Originally, I
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
On 01/30/2013 03:16 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
4: Also, LD_LIBRARY_PATH points to ppc64/libstdc++-v3/.libs/ while using
32bit gcc/xgcc to build
On 01/30/2013 04:56 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
On 01/30/2013 03:16 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
4: Also, LD_LIBRARY_PATH points to ppc64/libstdc++-v3/.libs/
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
Erm - the question is why the 64bit libstdc++ found via LD_LIBRARY_PATH (set
during libatomic build) didn't break these 32bit executables in your case.
I do not have the build any more, but
On 01/27/2013 03:16 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
Same here, building everything out-of-source. The prerequisites used are:
* CONFIG_SHELL=/usr/local/bin/bash 4.1.7 from bullfreeware (symlinks to
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
But still curious if you've been able to reproduce the problem,
and why you didn't encounter this problem beforehand.
As I mentioned before, because of --boot-ld-flags, with earlier libgcc
and
On Jan 28, 2013, at 7:07 AM, David Edelsohn dje@gmail.com wrote:
Over the weekend, I successfully tested a different way to configure
and build: all static libraries.
Yeah, I think our build instructions for the dependent libraries should say to
build them statically.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Mike Stump m...@mrs.kithrup.com wrote:
On Jan 28, 2013, at 7:07 AM, David Edelsohn dje@gmail.com wrote:
Over the weekend, I successfully tested a different way to configure
and build: all static libraries.
Yeah, I think our build instructions for the
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
Same here, building everything out-of-source. The prerequisites used are:
* CONFIG_SHELL=/usr/local/bin/bash 4.1.7 from bullfreeware (symlinks to
/opt/freeware/bin/)
* /usr/bin/{gcc,g++} 4.6.1 from
On 01/24/2013 06:45 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
Since switching to C++ inside gcc, it isn't possible to get working gcc/g++
binaries installed using native ld on AIX without this patch, as these need
dynamic libstdc++.a from builddir(!). Even after successful build with the
workaround from
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
Hmm - which oslevel -s do you use?
Here I've tried on 7100-01-05-1228.
Also available are 5300-08-09-1013 and 6100-07-05-1228.
I used to bootstrap on AIX 5.3. I now bootstrap on AIX 7.1 and I try
On 01/23/13 20:55, David Edelsohn wrote:
This patch looks okay, although it needs a ChangeLog entry.
Ok, inside the patch file now rather than at the end of the mail text.
I'm still unsure if the patch should contain a real ChangeLog diff or
a simple comment, as I doubt the ChangeLog diff
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
michael.haubenwall...@salomon.at wrote:
Ok, inside the patch file now rather than at the end of the mail text.
I'm still unsure if the patch should contain a real ChangeLog diff or
a simple comment, as I doubt the ChangeLog diff would
Ok, inside the patch file now rather than at the end of the mail text.
I'm still unsure if the patch should contain a real ChangeLog diff or
a simple comment, as I doubt the ChangeLog diff would apply smoothly.
The general approach is insert the ChangeLog, as text, in the body of
the email
Hi,
attached patch actually makes gcc-4.8 useable after removing builddir when
using native AIX ld,
as libstdc++ now really is statically linked into xgcc/xg++, like with other
platforms or with
GNU binutils on AIX.
This also renders those tries/patches needless that drop the
This patch looks okay, although it needs a ChangeLog entry.
Also, is this really sufficient? I guess you are linking the shared
libstdc++ library statically, which is bulky but will work. In the
past there have been problems linking libstdc++ statically without
explicitly linking libsupc++ as
18 matches
Mail list logo
