This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Repost: Fail to compile 64 bit gcc 3.0.2
- To: "'Ziying Sherwin'" <sherwin at nlm dot nih dot gov>
- Subject: RE: Repost: Fail to compile 64 bit gcc 3.0.2
- From: "Rupert Wood" <me at rupey dot net>
- Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 10:28:40 -0000
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Zywing Sherwin wrote:
(this would have been more appropriate on the gcc-help list)
> I try to compile 64 bit gcc on my Solaris 2.8 machine.
This isn't a supported configuration for 3.0; as mentioned in the
target-specific installation notes, you might instead wish to try GCC
3.1 from CVS if you really need 64-bit binaries.
I don't have authoritative knowledge but my best guess is that it has
omitted the usual system includes, perhaps because of confusion when
bootstrapping where host and target differ. (Try adding '-I/usr/include'
to the end of the compile line above for a successful build or '-v
-save-temps' to better see the error.) I concede that wasn't clear from
the error messages you received, though.
If you really want a 64-bit 3.02, you could either:
1. follow the full cross-compiler process to build a
sparc->sparcv9 cross, then bootstrap host and target=sparcv9
from the cross compiler
2. configure both host and target to be sparcv9-sun-solaris2.8,
build stage 1, rebuild the top level libiberty as 64-bit with
the stage 1 compiler and then finish the bootstrap.
However, you should beware that this configuration hasn't been well
tested and you should think twice before using it for production code.
For what it's worth, I tried the second method here for a C-only build:
it fails bootstrap comparison and has 24 testsuite failures in
gcc.c-torture/execute (but no other regressions w.r.t. the 32-bit