This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Failed compile, SCO OSR 5.0.5
- To: Robert Lipe <robertl at dgii dot com>
- Subject: Re: Failed compile, SCO OSR 5.0.5
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 10:52:21 -0600
- cc: Jean-Pierre Radley <jpr at jpr dot com>, EGCS Developers <egcs at cygnus dot com>
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <19980909101849.F11198@dgii.com>you write:
> > cc -c -DIN_GCC -g -I. -I.. -I../../../egcs/gcc/java -I../../../e
> gcs/gcc/java/.. -I../../../egcs/gcc/java/../config -I../../../egcs/gcc/java
> /../../include ../../../egcs/gcc/java/mangle.c
> > "../../../egcs/gcc/java/javaop.h", line 54: error: invalid type combinati
> on
> > "../../../egcs/gcc/java/javaop.h", line 116: warning: shift count negativ
> e or too big: << 32
> > "../../../egcs/gcc/java/javaop.h", line 116: warning: shift count negativ
> e or too big: << 32
>
>
> Hmmm. I don't know why I didn't notice this yesterday.
>
> I think this will fail for any bootstrap compiler that doesn't support
> 'long long'. I suspect the real problem is that java shouldn't be built
> in stage1 during a bootstrap and should have the build deferred until
> the stage2 (xgcc) compile is availble. Why is it being built at all?
I believe Tom fixed this last night.
jeff