Solaris 8/SPARC bootstrap broken building 64-bit libgcc

[Phil Edwards]

On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 12:52:25AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > 3.3 went out the door with some amazing problems; I'm just now discovering
> > them for myself.  I submit that, at present, the following statement is
> > essentially true.
> >
> >     The sparc-sun-solaris2.* platform is not supported.
> 
> That's a bit unfair. You haven't cared about this platform for some time, 
> suddendly you decide to give it a try and you run into some problems.

It has nothing to do with caring.  I didn't have a sparc "for some time."
Now I do.


> is to be expected on this platform, they are many nits to overcome. Instead 
> of trying to understand them, you say that everything is broken.

I do understand them.  They /are/ broken.  (Well, except for the preprocessor
one.  I don't understand that bug at all.)


> You seem to be using a non-standard configuration (for example, I skimmed 
> through dozen and dozen of bug reports for Solaris and never saw the 'sed' 
> problem reported; you use bash to bootstrap, we explicitly recommend ksh).
> Because of the shortage of resources, we are forced to support only a single 
> procedure.

I reported the sed problem well before 3.3.  It's in the mailing lists.

If using the most recent version of bash instead of ksh88 introduces more
problems, then that's another bug, and we need to explicity note that bash
is not to be used (even though it's recommended for other platforms).


> You reported that GCC 3.3 wasn't able to bootstrap itself and aborted with 
> the exact same error as GCC 3.0.2. I answered that GCC 3.3 is able to 
> bootstrap the current 3.3 branch and that you might not have properly 
> reconfigured. Did you try another time?

It wasn't reconfigured.  (I don't reconfigure troublesome trees.  I kill
them and start over.)  It was a brand new empty build directory.


> You reported some installation problems with multilibs. I submitted a patch 
> three weeks before the 3.3 release, but it was not reviewed quickly enough 
> and missed the release.

Pity.  Well, at least it's in now.


> Simply the lack of testing I'd say. The mainline is simply not tested on 
> SPARC for development, period.

Exactly.  That's why I made the statement I did.


> So it is very likely that, during phase1, the 
> platform will badly regress. So be it. In the meantime, we are fixing the 
> most serious regressions on the branch.

With any luck, I'll be able to start testing the trunk again.  If I retain
access to a SPARC, of course.


Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams