distro test rebuild using GCC 6

[Jeff Law]

On 01/13/2016 06:17 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Here are some first results from a distro test rebuild using GCC 6. A
> snapshot of the current Ubuntu development series was taken on 20151218
> for all architectures (amd64, arm64, armhf, i386/i686, powerpc, ppc64el,
> s390x), and rebuilt unmodified using the current GCC 5 branch, and using
> GCC 6 20160101 (then updated to 20160109).
>
> The build logs for package builds regressing with GCC 6 can be found at
> http://people.canonical.com/~doko/tmp/gcc6-regr/ (918 packages, compared
> to around 500 regressions seen in GCC 5)
>
> extracted from
> http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-20151218.1-gcc6-xenial.html
>
> http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-20151218.1-xenial-baseline-xenial.html
>
>
> The GCC 6 packages can be found at
> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-toolchain-r/+archive/ubuntu/test/
> GCC 6 packages for Debian are in Debian/experimental.
>
> Bug reports for all ICEs were submitted to the GCC bug tracker,
> excluding some where cc1/cc1plus was killed by the OS (haskell-src-exts,
> octomap, plasma-desktop, seqan (all arm64), freeorion (ppc64el).
>
> I haven't yet looked into the build failures except for the ICEs.  If
> somebody wants to help please let me know so that work isn't duplicated.
>
> I'm planning to do a second test rebuild for Debian/unstable (amd64
> only) in early Feb.
Thanks for all the work pulling this together.

We (the Red Hat engineers) were talking about the state of things 
yesterday.  There'll be an obvious focus on the gcc6 regressions, many 
of which were issues you've reported.  First priority is serious code 
correctness stuff, then the ICEs.

Ideally we'll make some major progress prior to early Feb -- which 
happens to line up with the proposed Fedora mass rebuild.

Jeff