Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 21:15:58 +0200 To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: gcc-2.95-pgcc-2.95.diff.gz released Message-ID: <19990802211558.E23909@cerebro.laendle> Mail-Followup-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com References: <19990730015250 DOT A12715 AT cerebro DOT laendle> <37A492DA DOT F5FAD8AB AT casema DOT net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <37A492DA.F5FAD8AB@casema.net>; from jkf@casema.net on Sun, Aug 01, 1999 at 08:32:58PM +0200 X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.2.10 (root AT cerebro) (gcc driver version egcs-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 release) executing gcc version 2.7.2.3) From: Marc Lehmann Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sun, Aug 01, 1999 at 08:32:58PM +0200, jkf AT casema DOT net wrote: > > It's also in CVS (pgcc-2_95). > > > > Enjoy. > > > > I tried the patch I will need to re-do the patch. However, due to time and bandwidth-limitations I can't do a diff against the gcc-2.95.tar.gz, only against the cvs version (which has subtle differences). And Bernhard, who is usually making (and checking!) the patches is currently away, so we might wait until 2.95.1 (which should be out in 1999-08-15). > What seems more serious, using the same pgcc CVS compiler, > pgcc-2.95 crashes, and gcc-2.95 goes on. (how did it crach when you couldn't built it?) > Here are the final reports from building pgcc-2.95: I can't explain these. But: > gcc -DIN_GCC -march=pentiumpro -O6 -o ../jc1 \ These are not the standard flags, which suggests you dsidn't follow the standard installation instructions. Following these and doing a bootstrap would most likely fix these problems. -- -----==- | ----==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e| -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | |