From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E1Ohw-0007RH-05 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 06 Aug 2005 13:27:24 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j76DO9is026035; Sat, 6 Aug 2005 13:24:09 GMT Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j76DO8UD022408 for ; Sat, 6 Aug 2005 13:24:08 GMT Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1E1Oed-0003IZ-QW for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 06 Aug 2005 15:23:59 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.97.182]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 06 Aug 2005 15:23:59 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 06 Aug 2005 15:23:59 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-amd64] gcc-4.0.1 compiled glibc-2.3.5.20050722, SUCCESS! Was: broken (32bit) glibc ? Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2005 06:23:15 -0700 Organization: Sometimes Message-ID: References: <1123237235.11188.36.camel@echelon.zagamma.vpn> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 56efbaba-1558-46bc-aa06-6bc17b4717b7 X-Archives-Hash: 387895e050a3727c0cc409d68cb8429a Duncan posted , excerpted below, on Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:17:41 -0700: > ... I'm thinking about trying the latest, newer snapshot, with (now) > gcc-4.0.1. I haven't done so yet, and of course if I did, I'd keep the > other versions in binpkg form, since the snapshot is still hard-masked. FWIW, I did just that. I'm now running a gcc-4.0.1 compiled glibc-2.3.5.20050722. One more thing working with gcc4! Woohoo! I /did/ have to modify one of the Gentoo patches, the pro-police-guard patch, I believe it was. That patch adds the -fno-stack-protector flag, recognized by gcc-3.4.4, but not gcc-4.0.1. After that, it compiled fine, and didn't give me the non-working 32-bit shared libraries I got with the earlier snapshot. I haven't looked at the gcc ebuilds to verify, but I'm guessing the pro-police stack-protector (and therefore the normal default no- flag that would turn it off if a hardened profile enabling it by default was in use) stuff isn't in the default gcc-3.4.x either, but rather a patch added by the ebuild. gcc4 hasn't gotten to the point yet where hardened is looking at it much, so the equivalent patches haven't been added there, yet, so gcc4 ebuilds don't recognize the stack-protector flags. I'm not running hardened, so didn't need the flag turning the stack-protector off. However, I tried compiling without the patch entirely, and while it worked for most things, it triggered the old __guard symbol errors in xorg bug from about a year ago, so I had to recompile with the patch, but just with the one line adding the -fno-stack-protector flag to CFLAGS commented out. All in all, due to a couple fat-fingerings/fat-headings on my part (like forgetting I had gcc-config-ed back to gcc-3.4.4, and doing an entire glibc recompile with 3.3.4 when I wanted 4.0.1! !), I must have recompiled glibc about four times, yesterday! I was sure putting my dual Opterons to use yesterday! OTOH, I found yet another package that doesn't yet like gcc4, as well. util-linux emerges fine with gcc4, which is why I hadn't noticed it b4, but I tried running cfdisk, and it segfaulted every single time I tried to load my hard drive! Interestingly enough, it worked fine as a user (that is, it protested about device access permissions and quit, as one would expect trying to run it as a user), and even worked just fine when I mistakenly pointed it at my DVD burner with a burnt DVD+R loaded (well it said read-only mode, but I wouldn't have expected it to work on the DVD at all, and it did), but it'd segfault every time I tried to point it at my hard drive, as root so it could actually read it. I run 100% reiserfs formatted hard drive partitions, however, and I'm guessing its reiserfs code isn't gcc4 safe, just yet, tho as I said it emerged fine. Since it worked with ISO9660 (surprising me), I'm guessing it probably works with the more common ext2/3 as well. It certainly doesn't like reiserfs, tho, when compiled with gcc4! As expected, recompiling it with gcc-3.4.4 worked just fine. (In fact, it was after that remerge that I forgot I had gcc-3.4.4 selected and did the entire glibc with gcc-3.4.4 instead of the gcc-4.0.1 I had intended!) So anyway... with gcc4 now working on glibc, it shouldn't be all /that/ much longer until Gentoo starts supporting gcc-4.x. This is fairly significant here, since Gentoo amd64 was one of the first to officially support gcc-3.4, and will likely be one of the first to support gcc-4.x as well, particularly since gcc support for amd64 is still maturing and thus new versions bringing more improvements than they do for the mature x86(32) arch. However, there are certainly still /other/ packages that need some attention, before that happens, util-linux obviously being one of them. That said, I've been rather surprised at how much already /does/ work with gcc4. Nearly my entire system, including all of the KDE (which had problems with gcc4 early on) I have installed, is now compiled with gcc4. I haven't kept precise track, but could probably count on one hand and certainly could count on two, the number of packages where the currently merged version has gcc4 issues that I've run into. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list