This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: bootstrap failure, linux, today's mainline
- From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- To: Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 18:26:22 +0200
- Subject: Re: bootstrap failure, linux, today's mainline
- References: <15614.14908.283096.713449@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com>
> I just copied over the current CVS (rsync the CVS database, then a
> clean checkout of the result). Did a bootstrap, it fails in stage 2.
>
> This is RedHat linux 7.2, kernel 2.4.18, base gcc is 3.0.2, binutils
> from the current binutils cvs server.
>
> In file included from /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/gengenrtl.c:29:/lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/real.h:122:8: #error "REAL_WIDTH > 5 not supported"
> In file included from /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/gengenrtl.c:40:/lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/rtl.def:727: `CONST_DOUBLE_FORMAT' undeclared here (not in a function)
This is misscompilation from 3.0.x GCC. You need to use different
version as bootstrap compiler :(
Honza
> /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/rtl.def:727: initializer element is not constant
> /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/rtl.def:727: (near initialization for `defs[65].format')
> /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/rtl.def:727: warning: missing initializer
> /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/rtl.def:727: warning: (near initialization for `defs[65].format')
> /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/rtl.def:727: initializer element is not constant
> /lhome/pkoning/gcccvs/gcc-20020605/gcc/gcc/rtl.def:727: (near
> initialization for `defs[65]') ...
>
> and lots more error messages, probably all caused by the initial
> error.
>
> I ran into this yesterday with a slightly older CVS checkout. In that
> one I did a --save-temps -dD and looked at the resulting rtl.i to see
> whether that explains the #error. It doesn't; the REAL_WIDTH I see in
> rtl.i evaluates to 3. So it looks like something wrong in expression
> evaluation in the preprocessor...
>
> paul
>