On 18 February 2005 09:42, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 18 February 2005 01:02, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
This is a known problem with gcc-2.95.
We came across it back in September.
It was noticed in the nightly builds:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/cvs-all/2004-September/035116.html
Remi Turk wrote:
[...] When using the following command-line
CC=gcc3 CXX=g++3 nice ./configure --enable-hopengl --prefix=/var/tmp/ghc
--with-gcc=/usr/local/bin/gcc3
[...]
Slightly off-topic: You don't need --enable-hopengl anymore when compiling
GHC 6.4 or the
CVS HEAD, the OpenGL/GLUT/OpenAL
On 18 February 2005 01:02, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
This is a known problem with gcc-2.95.
We came across it back in September.
It was noticed in the nightly builds:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/cvs-all/2004-September/035116.html
And then we chased it up:
On 18 February 2005 09:38, Remi Turk wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:29:41AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
I've noticed gcc 2.95 crashing on my FreeBSD box too. I should
look into whether there's a workaround, otherwise we're hosed on
FreeBSD 4.x.
(though I now assume it probably isn't
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 18 February 2005 04:26, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
At least this proves that it isn't a hardware problem. :)
Seth, you're a bit confused. This error from gcc is a deterministic,
repeatable, crash due to a known bug in gcc 2.95.
You were
Seth Kurtzberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon, you'll never give up. The crashes are absolutely repeatable.
The fact that I haven't identified a deterministic way to reproduce them
does not in any way imply that a deterministic way to reproduce them
does not exist. And, as I've said,
On 18 February 2005 10:17, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon, you'll never give up. The crashes are absolutely repeatable.
The fact that I haven't identified a deterministic way to reproduce
them does not in any way imply that a deterministic way to reproduce
them does not exist. And, as I've
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 18 February 2005 10:17, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon, you'll never give up. The crashes are absolutely repeatable.
The fact that I haven't identified a deterministic way to reproduce
them does not in any way imply that a deterministic way to reproduce
them
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with internal compiler error, I tried to compile it with gcc
3.4.3 (or rather, I thought it compiled with 3.4.1, and when that
died, compiled+installed gcc 3.4.3, tried again, say it die
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with internal compiler error, I tried to compile it with gcc
3.4.3 (or rather, I thought it compiled with 3.4.1, and when that
died, compiled+installed gcc 3.4.3, tried
On 17 February 2005 11:49, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with internal compiler error, I tried to compile it with gcc
3.4.3 (or rather, I thought it compiled with
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 04:48:54AM -0700, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with internal compiler error, I tried to compile it with gcc
3.4.3 (or rather, I thought it
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:49, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with "internal compiler error", I tried to
Remi Turk wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 04:48:54AM -0700, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with "internal compiler error",
On 17 February 2005 12:05, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
I'm not positive about 2.95, but I know that on 3.x it crashes in
different places, and even compiling different source files. With
each 3.x release, they fix some of them, but others pop up to take
their place. Clearly the gcc people don't
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 05:05:18AM -0700, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Remi Turk wrote:
I'm afraid finding a workaround for compilers dying on
compiler-generated code isn't going to be much fun...
Anyway, I just replaced a
ifneq $(INSTALL_LIBS)
by
ifneq $(strip $(INSTALL_LIBS))
Seth Kurtzberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There has to be one, because the problem occurs when you compile gcc
with gcc. I'll look for a specific bug report. It happens much more
frequently with 3.x than with 2.95, in my testing, but that was not a
test of compiling Haskell, so I have no
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Seth Kurtzberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There has to be one, because the problem occurs when you compile gcc
with gcc. I'll look for a specific bug report. It happens much more
frequently with 3.x than with 2.95, in my testing, but that was not a
test of compiling
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Seth Kurtzberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There has to be one, because the problem occurs when you compile gcc
with gcc. I'll look for a specific bug report. It happens much more
frequently with 3.x than with 2.95, in my testing, but that was not a
test
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 12:05, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
I'm not positive about 2.95, but I know that on 3.x it crashes in
different places, and even compiling different source files. With
each 3.x release, they fix some of them, but others pop up to take
their place. Clearly the
On 17 February 2005 12:43, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 12:05, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
I'm not positive about 2.95, but I know that on 3.x it crashes in
different places, and even compiling different source files. With
each 3.x release, they fix some
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:29:41AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with internal compiler error, I tried to compile it with gcc
3.4.3 (or rather, I thought it compiled with 3.4.1, and
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 12:43, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 12:05, Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
I'm not positive about 2.95, but I know that on 3.x it crashes in
different places, and even compiling different source files. With
each 3.x
[Resent, with a few #ifdef FOO's removed from the body (still in
the attachement, and using gzip instead of bzip2 to prevent
awaiting moderation ;)]
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:29:41AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc
rturk:
[Resent, with a few #ifdef FOO's removed from the body (still in
the attachement, and using gzip instead of bzip2 to prevent
awaiting moderation ;)]
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:29:41AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new
Remi Turk wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:29:41AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 17 February 2005 11:12, Remi Turk wrote:
when compiling the new ghc pre-releases made my gcc 2.95.3 die
with "internal compiler error", I tried to compile it with gcc
3.4.3 (or
26 matches
Mail list logo
