On Thursday, 17 September, 2015 11:29 CEST, Gordan Bobic <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2015-09-17 04:53, Jacco Ligthart wrote: > > On Wednesday, 16 September, 2015 05:17 CEST, "Jacco Ligthart" > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > <error_msg> > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/BaselineDebugModeOSR.cpp: > >> > > > In function 'void > >> > > > EmitBaselineDebugModeOSRHandlerTail(js::jit::MacroAssembler&, > >> > > > js::jit::Register, bool)': > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/BaselineDebugModeOSR.cpp:1080:23: > >> > > > error: reference to 'R0' is ambiguous > >> > > > jumpRegs.take(R0); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:43:3: note: candidates are: <anonymous > > >> > > > > enum> R0 > >> > > > R0 = 0, > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/arm/BaselineRegisters-arm.h:26:39: > >> > > > note: constexpr const js::jit::ValueOperand > >> > > > js::jit::R0 > >> > > > static MOZ_CONSTEXPR_VAR ValueOperand R0(r3, r2); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/BaselineDebugModeOSR.cpp:1081:23: > >> > > > error: reference to 'R1' is ambiguous > >> > > > jumpRegs.take(R1); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:45:3: note: candidates are: <anonymous > > >> > > > > enum> R1 > >> > > > R1 = 1, > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/arm/BaselineRegisters-arm.h:27:39: > >> > > > note: constexpr const js::jit::ValueOperand > >> > > > js::jit::R1 > >> > > > static MOZ_CONSTEXPR_VAR ValueOperand R1(r5, r4); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/BaselineDebugModeOSR.cpp:1091:23: > >> > > > error: reference to 'R1' is ambiguous > >> > > > masm.popValue(R1); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:45:3: note: candidates are: <anonymous > > >> > > > > enum> R1 > >> > > > R1 = 1, > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/arm/BaselineRegisters-arm.h:27:39: > >> > > > note: constexpr const js::jit::ValueOperand > >> > > > js::jit::R1 > >> > > > static MOZ_CONSTEXPR_VAR ValueOperand R1(r5, r4); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/BaselineDebugModeOSR.cpp:1092:23: > >> > > > error: reference to 'R0' is ambiguous > >> > > > masm.popValue(R0); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:43:3: note: candidates are: <anonymous > > >> > > > > enum> R0 > >> > > > R0 = 0, > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-38.2.1/mozilla-esr38/js/src/jit/arm/BaselineRegisters-arm.h:26:39: > >> > > > note: constexpr const js::jit::ValueOperand > >> > > > js::jit::R0 > >> > > > static MOZ_CONSTEXPR_VAR ValueOperand R0(r3, r2); > >> > > > ^ > >> > > > make[5]: *** [Unified_cpp_js_src3.o] Error 1 > >> > > > </error_msg> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Looking at the errors here, they don't look familiar, I think my FTBFS > >> > > was > >> > > different. I have a sneaky suspicion it might be related to some > >> > > headers > >> > > somewhere (/usr/include/sys/ucontext.h ?) > >> > You could be right, ucontext.h defines R0 and R1 etc, where the same > >> > things are called REG_R0 etc on RHEL6 (and RSEL7) > >> > > >> > So apparently, first step is to verify if ucontext.h is "correct". is it > >> > similar to older glibc-header files? etc. > >> > > >> > >> This looks like a nice description of what I see, including a patch > >> for glibc: > >> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.linaro.cross-distro/121 > >> > >> Any thoughts on this? > > > > To respond to myself: > > I got TB to build. the only changes made were Gordan's gcc-4.8 patch > > and the above mentioned glibc patch. > > If the mirrors pick it up, you guys can test. (I'm away from a test > > machine. I can build, but no clue if it installs, let alone works) > > > > FF is building right now. we have to wait to see if the same is enough > > to build that one also. > > Cool. Is that test package built using the chroot with manually > installed > bundled gcc, or with the modified gcc re-bundled and built from the top > down > as the src.rpms were intended to be built? >
rebundled as the srpm was meant to be used. J. _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.redsleeve.org/mailman/listinfo/users
