Successful GCC 3.2 build on sparc-sun-solaris2.6

[Vee Voon Yee]

Hi,

I have successfully built and used GCC 3.2 on Solaris 2.6

# ./config.guess
sparc-sun-solaris2.6

# gcc -v
Reading specs from /home/vy/localgcc/lib/gcc-lib/sparc-sun-solaris2.6/3.2/specs
Configured with: ../gcc-3.2/configure --prefix=/home/vy/localgcc 
--with-gnu-as --with-as=/home/vy/local4/bin/as --with-gnu-ld 
--with-ld=/home/vy/local4/bin/ld --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.2

Assembler and Linker:  (see important note below if you want to use the 
latest version 2.13)
  GNU as version 2.12.1
  GNU ld version 2.12.1

Languages: C, C++

Total compilation time (250MHz): about 1 hr 45 min.

Regards,
Voon Yee

NOTE:
The following combinations FAILS for C++ language:
        binutils-2.13 + gcc-3.2
        binutils-2.13 + gcc-3.1.1
The GCC compiler is generated, and compile C++ programs without any warning 
or error.
However, the compiled executable for a simple C++ 'hello world!' program 
(or even empty program) produces Segmentation Fault before it does anything 
else.  But binutils-2.12.1 + gcc-3.2 works perfectly for the same simple 
programs and under the same environment.

Nevertheless, these combinations seem to work well with several C programs 
(rather complicated) I've tested.

So I suspect that there's some incompatibility of binutils-2.13 with gcc on 
solaris?
A GDB on a simple 'hello world!' program reveals the following 
problem:  (either version of gcc above produces the same error:)
------------
(gdb) run
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
__register_frame_info_bases (begin=0xef790000, ob=0xef790000, tbase=0x0,
    dbase=0x0) at ../../gcc-3.2/gcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c:83
83        ob->tbase = tbase;
Current language:  auto; currently c
(gdb) bt
#0  __register_frame_info_bases (begin=0xef790000, ob=0xef790000, tbase=0x0,
    dbase=0x0) at ../../gcc-3.2/gcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c:83
#1  0xef7916b0 in frame_dummy ()
   from /home/vy/localgcc/lib/libgcc_s.so.1
#2  0xef791598 in _init () from /home/vy/localgcc/lib/libgcc_s.so.1
#3  0xef7ca88c in ?? ()
#4  0xef7ca6c8 in ?? ()
#5  0xef7d34ac in ?? ()
#6  0xef7c29bc in ?? ()
(gdb)
------------
I'm not familiar with this... probably I should submit a bug report to both 
GCC and binutils...?
Appreciate if anybody can enlighten me about this.