This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
- From: Matthias Klose <doko at cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, mark at codesourcery dot com, debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org
- Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:40:01 +0200
- Subject: Re: [3.2] Reconsider patches for bison 1.50?
- References: <20021020214101.GA31693@codesourcery.com>
Zack Weinberg writes:
> This is a quote from the Debian package changelog for gcc 3.2:
>
> * FTBS: With the switch to bison-1.50 (and 1.75), gcc-3.2 fails to build from
> source on Debian unstable systems. This is fixed in gcc HEAD, but not on
> the current release branch.
> HELP NEEDED:
> - check what is missing from the patches in debian/patches/bison.dpatch.
> This is a backport of the bison related patches, but showing regressions
> in the gcc testsuite, so it cannot be applied.
> - build gcc using byacc (bootstrap currently fails using byacc).
> - build bison-1.35 in it's own package (the current 1.35-3 package fails
> to build form source).
> - and finally ask upstream to backport the patch to the branch. It's not
> helpful not beeing able to follow the stable branch. Maybe we should
> just switch to gcc HEAD as BSD does ...
> As a terrible workaround, build the sources from CVS first on a machine,
> with bison-1.35 installed, then package the tarball, so the bison
> generated files are not rebuilt.
>
> I think we should reconsider not backporting the patches for bison 1.50
> to the 3.2 branch.
btw, I noticed the very same regressions on HEAD hppa-linux, but not
on HEAD i386-linux.