[gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Milos Negovanovic]

Hello again,

when can we expect switch to gcc3?...just curious

Regards
Milos

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 714 bytes --]



begin  quote
On Tue, 21 May 2002 10:24:48 +1200
Milos Negovanovic <milosn@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:

> Hello again,
> 
> when can we expect switch to gcc3?...just curious
> 
> Regards
> Milos


bootstrapping with gcc 3.1 now works (as of -r1) 

texinfo 4.2 cleanout is on my "to do" list

PreZ should have perl fixed tonight

XFree86 4.2 is next in line to get fixed. ( currently generates internal
compiler error if no warnings, and if -Wall you get a loooot of missing
files.)


Status updated.  did you even care to check the gcc 3.1 - what breaks
thread?

//Spider
--
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Casey Cain]

Slightly off topic..how do you personally and/or other developers 
avoid polluting your main install when tesing gcc-3.1 and 
other system level stuff? 
partitions? usermode? virtual machines?
Thanks...


Casey

Re: [gentoo-dev] How to avoid breakage. Was: gcc 3.1

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1199 bytes --]

I'm doing it two ways:
1) multi-gcc with gcc 3.0.4  (gcc3 profile) where it works rather nicely
(installs into a different path and only the compiler changes)

2) a chroot partition  where I do bootstrap testing and full system
builds.

I'd love to have a second machine, or a more powerful current one where
I could actually do some "real" testing without damaging my main system,
but for everything except compilers, I break my current system because
thats the only one I have. (X through chroot doesn't work well, and
boot-toggling between versions is not an option for me)

//Spider

begin  quote
On Mon, 20 May 2002 18:47:14 -0700
Casey Cain <cjv99@shaw.ca> wrote:

> Slightly off topic..how do you personally and/or other developers 
> avoid polluting your main install when tesing gcc-3.1 and 
> other system level stuff? 
> partitions? usermode? virtual machines?
> Thanks...
> 
> 
> Casey
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev


--
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Milos Negovanovic]

nop, have not tryed 3.1 myself, but i am planing to ... was just
wondering whats the current status.

Regards
Milos

On Tue, 21 May 2002 03:02:01 +0200
Spider <spider@gentoo.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> begin  quote
> On Tue, 21 May 2002 10:24:48 +1200
> Milos Negovanovic <milosn@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:
> 
> > Hello again,
> > 
> > when can we expect switch to gcc3?...just curious
> > 
> > Regards
> > Milos
> 
> 
> bootstrapping with gcc 3.1 now works (as of -r1) 
> 
> texinfo 4.2 cleanout is on my "to do" list
> 
> PreZ should have perl fixed tonight
> 
> XFree86 4.2 is next in line to get fixed. ( currently generates internal
> compiler error if no warnings, and if -Wall you get a loooot of missing
> files.)
> 
> 
> Status updated.  did you even care to check the gcc 3.1 - what breaks
> thread?
> 
> //Spider
> --
> begin  .signature
> This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
> See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
> end
> 

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Matthew Kennedy]

I went from a bootstrapped gcc3 profile with gcc3.0.4 to gcc3.1. Some
stuff I've seen break so far:

gtkmm:
  wouldn't compile without patch. fixed in portage cvs though (unmask
  x11-libs/gtkmm-1.2.9-r1 and test it for me)

galeon:
  similar situation. soon to be fixed in portage cvs (will be 1.2.1-r2
  when i commit it shortly -- test that too if you can)

If some kind volunteers could test these two items with gcc2.95.3,
gcc3.0.4 and gcc3.1 and let me or some other dev know if they work for
each, we'll unmask them.

Appart from that, I've found you need to re-emerge basically any package
who's libs or binaries depend on libstdc++.so.3. (c++-based apps).

I'll post more stuff to this thread as I find it. And, no... I haven't
tried KDE/QT with gcc3.1 yet :)

Matt

On Mon, 2002-05-20 at 17:24, Milos Negovanovic wrote:
> when can we expect switch to gcc3?...just curious

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[MadCoder]

> I'll post more stuff to this thread as I find it. And, no... I haven't
> tried KDE/QT with gcc3.1 yet :)

QT doesn't work. I got a broken piep I think.
and xfree won't compile either.
-- 
MadCoder (53 53)

"Economiquement, puisque l'entreprise qui investit retire tout
le bénéfice de la partie de la fonction de production de la
joint venture qui ne dépend pas du terme de complémentarité
entre les investissements, elle a intérêt à investir plus."

        - JP Ponssard

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Matthew Kennedy]

On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 13:55, MadCoder wrote:
> QT doesn't work. I got a broken piep I think.
> and xfree won't compile either.

Cool. Keep posting stuff like that. I think the xfree problem is known
issue. Not sure about qt.

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Alex Walker]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 02:19:39PM -0500, Matthew Kennedy wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 13:55, MadCoder wrote:
> > QT doesn't work. I got a broken piep I think.
> > and xfree won't compile either.
> Cool. Keep posting stuff like that. I think the xfree problem is known
> issue. Not sure about qt.

The QT error (at least mine) refers to undefined references is
/usr/X11R6/lib/libGLU.so, which is part of xfree, so I was figuring
recompiling xfree would help... but since it doesn't just yet...

Keep up the good work!

Alex.

-- 
\\\\\\         I don't care where I sit as long as I get fed.         //////
\\\\                          -- Calvin Trillin                         ////
\\                                                                        //

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[MadCoder]

> The QT error (at least mine) refers to undefined references is
> /usr/X11R6/lib/libGLU.so, which is part of xfree, so I was figuring
> recompiling xfree would help... but since it doesn't just yet...

yes you're right, I got this error too.
sorry.

hope xfree will come soon
-- 
Don't be afraid ... I'm going to give you the choice I've never had

(°>
/ )  MadCoder (53 53)
^^

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Christophe Vanfleteren]

On Wednesday 22 May 2002 21:24, Alex Walker wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 02:19:39PM -0500, Matthew Kennedy wrote:
> > On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 13:55, MadCoder wrote:
> > > QT doesn't work. I got a broken piep I think.
> > > and xfree won't compile either.
> >
> > Cool. Keep posting stuff like that. I think the xfree problem is known
> > issue. Not sure about qt.
>
> The QT error (at least mine) refers to undefined references is
> /usr/X11R6/lib/libGLU.so, which is part of xfree, so I was figuring
> recompiling xfree would help... but since it doesn't just yet...

compling QT without opengl support worked for me (my videocard doesn't support 
it properly anyway (laptop, siliconmotion)) 
I never tried to recompile X tough,  I still had a binary package that I 
compiled earlier lying around, and I figured I would recompile X later, when 
it would work with gcc3.1. 

KDE itself works: kdebase and kdelibs compiled.
I first compiled the normal ebuilds, and later compiled the cvs version, as I 
couldn't wait for the tabbed browsing  (wich makes konqueror and even better 
browser, no more mozilla for me :)

Oh, and I compiled everything with the masked binutils(2.12.90.0.7), it really 
makes a big difference in startup time for KDE apps.

Christope Vanfleteren

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[MadCoder]

> Cool. Keep posting stuff like that. I think the xfree problem is known
> issue. Not sure about qt.
that's the only problems I know. Other packages doesn't compile, but in fact, 
they have a problem with autoconf, and it breaks at configure time :(

my gentoo is on my laptop, and is like a laboratory, so i tried to compile a 
big part with gcc3.1.

in "system" all works but autoconf/automake

for other packages, the problems i met are xfree, qt, procps, pciutils, grub, 
gpm, gdb, cscope. (i didn't tried KDE because I could'nt have X and QT... and 
I don't use gnome/gtk a lot)

for a part, it's a problme with autoconf/automake, for many others I have a 
"broken pipe" and for the rest, I have "no rule to buils target ### found" or 
something like that.

-- 
MadCoder (53 53)

"Un OS n'est pas censé être obscur, bizarre et plein de pièges
(ça, ce sont les attributs de la magie)"

        - Dave Small

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Alex Walker]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 09:29:50PM +0200, MadCoder wrote:
> > Cool. Keep posting stuff like that. I think the xfree problem is
> > known issue. Not sure about qt.
> for other packages, the problems i met are xfree, qt, procps,
> pciutils, grub, gpm, gdb, cscope. (i didn't tried KDE because I
> could'nt have X and QT... and I don't use gnome/gtk a lot)

Yeah, KDE doesn't work because of a QT error, QT because of an xfree
error...

The big problem I have is having no makeinfo command, so I can't
recompile util-linux, which means I can't stop my login command
segfaulting/OOPsing... which means if my compuer decides to reboot or
the power goes, I may have to re-install cos I won't be able to log-in.

Anyway, that's coming in texinfo, so then I just need m4 so that
auto{conf,make} will work.

It's all a very good distraction from revision.  If anyone wants to do
any of the revision for me, please just pick a topic from
http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~lad/DDB/ and then transfer the knowledge to me
whilst I'm asleep tonight... thanks.

Alex.

-- 
oOoOo             The Public is merely a multiplied "me."              oOoOo
 oOoOo                          -- Mark Twain                         oOoOo
  oOoOo                                                              oOoOo

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Martin Schlemmer]

On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 21:37, Alex Walker wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 09:29:50PM +0200, MadCoder wrote:
> > > Cool. Keep posting stuff like that. I think the xfree problem is
> > > known issue. Not sure about qt.
> > for other packages, the problems i met are xfree, qt, procps,
> > pciutils, grub, gpm, gdb, cscope. (i didn't tried KDE because I
> > could'nt have X and QT... and I don't use gnome/gtk a lot)
> 
> Yeah, KDE doesn't work because of a QT error, QT because of an xfree
> error...
> 
> The big problem I have is having no makeinfo command, so I can't
> recompile util-linux, which means I can't stop my login command
> segfaulting/OOPsing... which means if my compuer decides to reboot or
> the power goes, I may have to re-install cos I won't be able to log-in.
> 
> Anyway, that's coming in texinfo, so then I just need m4 so that
> auto{conf,make} will work.
> 
> It's all a very good distraction from revision.  If anyone wants to do
> any of the revision for me, please just pick a topic from
> http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~lad/DDB/ and then transfer the knowledge to me
> whilst I'm asleep tonight... thanks.
> 

unmask sys-apps/pam-login, and try that for now.

-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Alex Walker]

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:02:27AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> unmask sys-apps/pam-login, and try that for now.

Erm, where is it masked?  can't find it in /etc/make.profile/* or
/usr/portage/* is there somewhere else I should look?

Alex

-- 
... It's recently come to Fortune's attention that scientists have stopped
    using laboratory rats in favor of attorneys.  Seems that there are not
    only more of them, but you don't get so emotionally attached.  The only
    difficulty is that it's sometimes difficult to apply the experimental
    results to humans.

	    [Also, there are some things even a rat won't do.  Ed.]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Matthew Kennedy]

On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 14:37, Alex Walker wrote:
> 
> The big problem I have is having no makeinfo command, so I can't
> recompile util-linux, which means I can't stop my login command

You might have to unmask texinfo-4.2 to get the info stuff.

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[David Leal]

On Wednesday 22 May 2002 20:37, Alex Walker wrote:
: The big problem I have is having no makeinfo command, so I can't
: recompile util-linux, which means I can't stop my login command
: segfaulting/OOPsing... which means if my compuer decides to reboot or
: the power goes, I may have to re-install cos I won't be able to log-in.

Isn't login bypassed when you boot with linux init=/bin/sh?

Cheers,

David

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Alex Walker]

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:13:42PM +0100, David Leal wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 May 2002 20:37, Alex Walker wrote:
> : The big problem I have is having no makeinfo command, so I can't
> : recompile util-linux, which means I can't stop my login command
> : segfaulting/OOPsing... which means if my compuer decides to reboot or
> : the power goes, I may have to re-install cos I won't be able to log-in.
> Isn't login bypassed when you boot with linux init=/bin/sh?

Yes, you're right, but in the end I broke things beyond repair and am
just bootsrapping with gcc-3.1.

gcc-3.1 + binutils-2.12 doesn't work for me BTW - glibc errors out.

Alex.

-- 
Burbulation:
 The obsessive act of opening and closing a refrigerator door in
 an attempt to catch it before the automatic light comes on.
  -- "Sniglets", Rich Hall & Friends

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Matthew Kennedy]

On Thu, 2002-05-23 at 08:13, Alex Walker wrote:
> Yes, you're right, but in the end I broke things beyond repair and am
> just bootsrapping with gcc-3.1.
> 
> gcc-3.1 + binutils-2.12 doesn't work for me BTW - glibc errors out.

I just emerged binutils with a gcc3.1 only system and can say that it
works for me no problems. I wonder if some problems which appear to be
gcc3.1 related are more related to having more than one gcc version
merged...



-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Lost Logic]

I just tested gtkmm and galeon on gcc-3.1 and you get a thumbs up 
there.

Do you know the status of Perl with GCC-3.1?  

--Brandon

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Previous Message(s)-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> I went from a bootstrapped gcc3 profile with gcc3.0.4 to gcc3.1. Some
> stuff I've seen break so far:
> 
> gtkmm:
>   wouldn't compile without patch. fixed in portage cvs though (unmask
>   x11-libs/gtkmm-1.2.9-r1 and test it for me)
> 
> galeon:
>   similar situation. soon to be fixed in portage cvs (will be 1.2.1-r2
>   when i commit it shortly -- test that too if you can)
> 
> If some kind volunteers could test these two items with gcc2.95.3,
> gcc3.0.4 and gcc3.1 and let me or some other dev know if they work for
> each, we'll unmask them.
> 
> Appart from that, I've found you need to re-emerge basically any package
> who's libs or binaries depend on libstdc++.so.3. (c++-based apps).
> 
> I'll post more stuff to this thread as I find it. And, no... I haven't
> tried KDE/QT with gcc3.1 yet :)
> 
> Matt
> 
> On Mon, 2002-05-20 at 17:24, Milos Negovanovic wrote:
> > when can we expect switch to gcc3?...just curious
> 
> -- 
> Matthew Kennedy
> Gentoo Linux Developer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[MadCoder]

Le Mercredi 22 Mai 2002 22:24, Lost Logic a écrit :
> I just tested gtkmm and galeon on gcc-3.1 and you get a thumbs up
> there.
>
> Do you know the status of Perl with GCC-3.1?
the -r3 compile without any problem. the -r4 doesn't
-- 
Linux, c'est comme la France, ce serait le + beau pays du monde s'il
n'était pas peuplé par des arrogants, suffisants pensants détenir
tout le savoir du monde...

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Casey Cain]

On 05 02, 00:18, MadCoder wrote:
> Le Mercredi 22 Mai 2002 22:24, Lost Logic a ?crit :
> > I just tested gtkmm and galeon on gcc-3.1 and you get a thumbs up
> > there.
> >
> > Do you know the status of Perl with GCC-3.1?
> the -r3 compile without any problem. the -r4 doesn't

The r4 just finished compiling for me like 10 min ago..no problems at
all.

Casey

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[Matthew Kennedy]

On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 15:24, Lost Logic wrote:
> I just tested gtkmm and galeon on gcc-3.1 and you get a thumbs up 
> there.

Cool. Now if someone can gives thumbs up for gcc 2.95.3 and 3.0.4, we
can look at unmasking it.

> Do you know the status of Perl with GCC-3.1?  

No... but afaik, it's being worked on.

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1 (alsaplayer -- please test)

[Matthew Kennedy]

Alsaplayer (media-sound/alsaplayer) is another thing that breaks under
gcc3.1. I've added a corrected and updated version, but it is masked.
Someone want to test that for us under gcc 2.95.3 and 3.0.4 (3.1 too)?

Matt

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

[gentoo-dev] gcc 3.1

[MadCoder]

So, i want tu use gcc 3.1 to compile my gentoo. But i want to preserve my 
gcc-2.95

how it is possible to tell the gentoo to use gcc-3.1 by default ?

is the link /etc/make.globals on /usr/portage/profile/default-1.0-gcc3 enough, 
or must I set some environment variable ?
-- 
MadCoder (53 53)

"Economiquement, puisque l'entreprise qui investit retire tout
le bénéfice de la partie de la fonction de production de la
joint venture qui ne dépend pas du terme de complémentarité
entre les investissements, elle a intérêt à investir plus."

        - JP Ponssard