Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 15:27:31 -0700 From: Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net> To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> Subject: Re: svn commit: r439595 - in head/devel: aarch64-gcc aarch64-none-elf-gcc amd64-gcc arm-none-eabi-gcc arm-none-eabi-gcc492 mips-gcc mips64-gcc powerpc64-gcc riscv64-gcc sparc64-gcc Message-ID: <8E45FA57-8D2E-4159-8E02-6A5044000CC2@dsl-only.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Just FYI: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D10537 may help with powerpc64-gcc slave ports (and powerpc64-gcc itself) when they are built on the type of machine that they target. As of devel/*binutils -r436732 and -r432733 (the update to 2.28) many things are broken for linking with debug information that were not before (for example). It turns out to be because of a change in return code for reporting issues for the cases I know about: the new return code stops the build (and the return code is likely appropriate long term as I understand). For example a formerly ignored debug information issue now blocks various builds when a (modern) binutils is involved. [Because of this I've been reverting devel/*binutils to -r436731 each time I update the revision of /usr/ports.] As of ports head -r439263 with reverting devel/*binutils to -r436731 and the patch from D10537 I tested building the following earlier today as part of reviewing D10537: amd64: built amd64-gcc powerpc64-gcc aarch64-gcc powerpc64: built powerpc64-gcc aarch64: built aarch64-gcc (Note: aarch64 is using -mcpu=cortex-a53 explicitly.) Context: head -r317015 in each case. (WITH_LLD_IS_LD= was used on aarch64.) (powerpc64 is system-clang/libc++ based, used devel/*binutils) If the information would be useful I could try some other combinations under the patch and the older binutils for comparison. (That does not say when anyone might use the information.) I also have access to armv7. (In this context I normally use -mcpu=cortex-a7 explicitly.) So I could try that type of host as well. I do not have access to mips, mips64, riscv, sparc64 so they could be targets but not hosts in my tests: always cross-builds. I have access to powerpc but currently am not well set up to use it without rebuilding it as gcc 4.2.1 based for buildworld, not just buildkernel. (clang generates bad stack handling for some contexts for 32-bit powerpc.) === Mark Millard markmi at dsl-only.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8E45FA57-8D2E-4159-8E02-6A5044000CC2>