Re: the struggle for a 64-bit GCC on Solaris 10 - part 2

[Dennis Clarke <dclarke at blastwave dot org>]

> > I hope I don't have to go fire up my old Solaris 8 server but, it 
> did always result in a good looking GCC bootstrap.

Let's clear the air here. 

> You still didn't say why starting with the Solaris compiler is so 
> undesirable... you do realize that the gcc you finally end up with 
> (stage 3) will have been built by a gcc (stage 2) that was itself 
> built  by the gcc (stage 1) produced by suncc, right? Bootstrapping a 
> separate version of gcc yourself just to build that stage 1 gcc with adds extra 

Okay, things I know as facts. 

fact : you can not build libgmp with Sun cc 

fact: I already have gcc compilers built and bootstrapped and tested and filed and then those in turn built other GCC compiler packages that have been tested and released and test reports filed. 

thought : I see no value in using the Sun/Oracle compilers to build GNU C compiler collection

> (and painful and unnecessary) steps to the process.

Also .. there are no Makefile changes done by me. I am working with a pure clean source code tarball from ft.gnu.org/pub/gnu/gcc with no mods from me at all. 

> In the time you've spent writing these emails, a sunc-based bootstrap 

I doubt that. Highly. 

> could have completed several times, modulo those funky CFLAGS you 
> added. 

No such funky CFLAGS are in effect. Only -m64 and a few non-funky totally sane falgs .. but hey .. I'll try it again without -D_TS_ERRNO and see what happens. 

> Heck, you could have bootstrapped 4.7.2 and then used *that* to 
> bootstrap a "clean" 4.7.2 in the time these emails have taken so far.

* sigh * 

Usually I do a triple bootstrap before I file a test report but thus far I have yet to see GCC 4.7.x bootstrap even once on Solaris 10.  Solaris 8 .. yeah sure, no problem. Solaris 10 .. no. 

So I will go back and do it again. 

Dennis