This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: java/6092: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 has hundreds of libjava failures with -m64
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
- Date: 30 Mar 2002 22:56:01 -0000
- Subject: Re: java/6092: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 has hundreds of libjava failures with -m64
- Reply-to: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
The following reply was made to PR java/6092; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: java/6092: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 has hundreds of libjava failures with -m64
Date: 30 Mar 2002 15:54:50 -0700
Kaveh> spawn [open ...]
Kaveh> 7 file6
Kaveh> close result is child killed: illegal instruction
Thanks.
Kaveh> (I don't know what the "7 file6" means.)
It is dejagnu debugging output. You can ignore it.
Kaveh> Hmm, actually it *does* remove the FAILed executables. Well,
Kaveh> let's see, I was running several passes and the -m64 pass goes
Kaveh> first. I guess the subsequent passes without -m64 PASSed these
Kaveh> tests and removed the executable. :-)
Ah, yes. Sorry about that.
Kaveh> That seems ok. So I ran it and got:
Kaveh> Abort (core dumped)
Ok. Often symptoms like this will mean some pretty low-level problem,
like binutils failure or some basic problem with the port.
Kaveh> If you'd like me to attempt anything else let me know.
Kaveh> Alternatively, you could get a solaris2 box and run make check
Kaveh> with: setenv RUNTESTFLAGS "--verbose
Kaveh> --target_board='unix{-m64,}'" to get both regular and -m64
Kaveh> passes.
I finally read about -m64 in the manual. It sets the pointer size to
64 bits. I think you would have to build the entire runtime with -m64
for this to even have a chance of working.
For instance, "hello world" with gcj needs a virtual method call. If
the hello program and the runtime disagree on pointer size, this is
going to fail.
Is there some mitigating factor I'm unaware of? I'm inclined to say
that this isn't really a bug, and that you must make a -m64 multilib
if you want that to work.
Tom