This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bootstrap failure of gcc cvs trunk (3.3) on sparc64-{solaris*,linux}
- From: <c dot christian dot joensson at telia dot com>
- To: Robert Schiele <rschiele at uni-mannheim dot de>
- Cc: gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 19:12:27 +0100
- Subject: Re: Bootstrap failure of gcc cvs trunk (3.3) on sparc64-{solaris*,linux}
- References: <20021206071953.GA24619@j-son.org> <20021206080958.GA30573@schiele.local>
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 09:12:31AM +0100, Robert Schiele wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 08:19:54AM +0100, Christian Jönsson wrote:
> > Hej.
> >
> > I was just wondering if you have any clue on what the bootstrap
> > failure might depend on?
>
> I tracked that down to a really simple case, which is c++/8183.
> Current mainline fails when trying to compile a diamond object
> structure when the inheritance to the common base class is declared
> virtual.
>
> > I was really amazed that Dave M got it through... I still don't... and
>
> Note that Dave is building the compiler for Linux, where my failing
> case is on Solaris, although both are sparc64 systems. Because of
> that I assume the problem is somewhat related to a different data type
> definition in the C library headers of those two platforms and some
> code in gcc cannot handle the Solaris version of that data type
> correctly.
>
> Did you try on Linux or on Solaris?
>
> > I don't know how to debug it either...
>
> I hope, the simplified test case in c++/8183 gives you some hints.
>
> > It would be neat to have it ironed out before the branching 3.3...
>
> Sure. I'm still waiting for a generic bug removing tool. ;-)
Anyhow, the bootstrap/build succeeded on sparc64-linux for
./contrib/gcc_update -D "Sep 13 10:00 UTC 2002"
but failed in complex_io.cc (ICE) for
./contrib/gcc_update -D "Sep 17 10:00 UTC 2002"
and I'd guess, from Robert's testsuite results report, that that's
true for sparc64-solaris* also.
The cvs diff for that time period is