results in: (all from config.log) configure:5144: checking for version 0.10 of PPL configure:5166: gcc -c -I/usr/system64/include -L/usr/system64/lib -L/usr/system64/lib64 -Iyes/include -I/usr/system64/include -L/usr/system64/lib -L/usr/system64/lib64 conftest.c >&5 configure:5172: $? = 0 configure:5265: checking for correct version of CLooG configure:5287: gcc -c -I/usr/system64/include -L/usr/system64/lib -L/usr/system64/lib64 -Iyes/include -DCLOOG_PPL_BACKEND -Iyes/include -I/usr/system64/include -L/usr/system64/lib -L/usr/system64/lib64 conftest.c >&5 configure:5293: $? = 0 LIBS='-Lyes/lib -lcloog -Lyes/lib -lppl_c -lppl -lgmpxx ' clooginc='-Iyes/include -DCLOOG_PPL_BACKEND ' clooglibs='-Lyes/lib -lcloog' As of recent with gcc 4.5.0, to use the CLOOG_PPL_BACKEND, --with-cloog and --with-ppl must be specified in the command line, making this more notable.
I imagine this applies to any target, not just win64 targets. I can't change that setting, though.
(In reply to comment #1) > I imagine this applies to any target, not just win64 targets. I can't change > that setting, though. I am quite sure it applies to any target, but I am unable to test any target. Feel free to post verifications of other targets. I should have listed the other ones I know it applies to - like I did for build - and updated that. This bug needs to be confirmed.
I have now, in an attempt at a testcase, have found this bug to have further implications. Trying to turn off mpc, ppl, and/or cloog has the same behavior, i.e. --without-mpc causes: gmpinc: '-I/no/include' gmplibs: '-L/no/lib -lmpc -lmpfr -lgmp' This is more serious now as mpc cannot be turned off without manual hacking. I am surprized this has not yet been confirmed. I can also now say that target x86_64-linux-unknown-gnu produces the same problem. It is safe to say it is fairly target indescriminate.
How come this is still sitting unconfirmed? This is something that involves Linux et. al. Using --without-cloog, ppl, or mpc doesn't work right as per previous post, so it is more than just cosmetic. I don't really care personally, just trying to help gcc.
(In reply to comment #4) > How come this is still sitting unconfirmed? This is something that involves > Linux et. al. Using --without-cloog, ppl, or mpc doesn't work right as per > previous post, so it is more than just cosmetic. Presumably, because GCC devs haven't had time to look at this in detail and it is not a priority compared to other issues. Note that at this moment there are 1288 unconfirmed bugs. > I don't really care personally, just trying to help gcc. Thanks, any help is greatly appreciated.
Is it supported to build GCC without MPC?
(In reply to nightstrike from comment #6) > Is it supported to build GCC without MPC? NO. GCC requires mpc to build. Also cloog/ppl support has been removed and replaced with ISL. Toplevel configure.ac has now: # Treat --without-isl as a request to disable # GRAPHITE support and skip all following checks. So I am going to assume this was fixed for ISL and MPC needs to be there and CLOOG and PPL support was removed. So closing as works for me.