Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 16:42:57 +0200 (WET) From: Andris Pavenis To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Cc: VJSuorsa AT Surfeu DOT Fi, Gpc AT gnu DOT de Subject: Re: Need GPC installation In-Reply-To: <3ABF4D55.9000501@ujf-grenoble.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Maurice Lombardi wrote: > Mr. Veli Suorsa wrote: > > > Thanks for your reply! > > > > > >>> ftp://agnes.dida.physik.uni-essen.de/home/maurice/gpc2952b.zip > >> > >> OK. I try to always give under this same link the lastest gpc snapshot I have > >> compiled, and which give zero error when running the whole test suite. > > > > I just updated gcc-2.95.3 version of Djgpp. Every other compiler seems to work > > well (Thanks to Andris). > > > > Can You update this Pascal compiler (gpc2953b.zip) and documentation and inform > > me (download site), too? > > Mmm. There is something broken in gpc under gcc-2.9.5.3. > It compiles with snapshot gpc-20010315, but it gives lots of errors > when running the test suite. As a comparison I have compiled the same > snapshot under gcc-2.9.5.2 (the result is on agnes) and it gives zero error > for the test suite. I testetd with gpc-20010317 > > Briefly speaking: > > when applying the patch contained in the p/diff directory (I have taken > the same diff as for gcc-295 -2951 -2952 which are identical), I get the > following messages > > C:\djgpp\gnu\gcc-2.953\gcc>patch -p1 < p\diffs\gcc-2.95.3.diff > patching file "expr.c" > Hunk #1 succeeded at 4505 (offset 75 lines). > Hunk #3 succeeded at 4542 (offset 75 lines). > patching file "fold-const.c" > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1462 (offset 1 line). > patching file "stor-layout.c" > patching file "tree.c" > Hunk #1 succeeded at 5025 (offset 39 lines). > Hunk #3 succeeded at 5100 (offset 39 lines). > patching file "tree.h" > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1631 (offset 1 line). > patching file "tree.def" > > No hunk fails, so I proceed with a 3 stage bootstrap. > Seems OK but when running dostest it crashes midway, after lots of errors > the log file is on agnes: > > ftp://agnes.dida.physik.uni-essen.de/home/maurice/make.2953.out I had many failures also. > It appears that: > > all failed programs include units, either by an explicit uses clause in the > main, by a --uses= compilator option or even throug $L > there are error messages > gpc.exe: installation problem, cannot exec `cpp': No such file or directory (ENOENT) > > indeed cpp has been renames cpp0 in this release. perhaps we should have p/diffs/gcc-2.95.3.diff where this is fixed > I have include in djgpp.env a [cpp0] identical to [cpp] (and kept [cpp] > to be sure. No change. > > Looking in the changelog I find indeed > > 2000-12-18 Zack Weinberg : > > * Makefile.in: Rename cpp to cpp0, tradcpp to tradcpp0, and > xcpp to cpp throughout. > (native): Remove unnecessary dependency on cpp. > * gcc.c (C specs): Call cpp0 to do preprocessing, not cpp. > * ch/lang-specs.h, cp/lang-specs.h, f/lang-specs.h, > objc/lang-specs.h: Call cpp0 to do preprocessing, not cpp. > > The corresponding change to p/lang-specs.h has not been done of course. > Could it be the only change to do ? > > I have no more clue. > I think this renaming is understandable to avoid having executable with the same name (cpp.$exeext) in 2 directories. I have seen related trouble with DJGPP port of gcc-2.95.X (before 2.95.3) and avoided it by leaving $prefix/bin/cpp.exe out of gcc295Xb.zip. > Has anybody tried to compile gpc with gcc2953 on a linux machine? Yes. I tried. I run into some trouble when GPC_FOR_TARGET was not passed from top level make to one in gcc subdirectory as ./xgpc -B./ is wring for Canadian crosses of course. As result make fails in gcc/p/rts. I added definition of GPC_FOR_TARGET in t op level makefile and passing it make in subdirectories. > I use bnu210 (and have suppressed accordingly the various -mno-bnu210 > in djbuild1.sh). djgpp v2.03 in a W98 dos box. I have first installed > gcc2953b.zip and compiled with it. > If You want -mno-bnu210 to be usefull at all, You should use binutils-2.8.1 or 2.9.1. For gcc-2.95.3 I made -mbnu210 the default and added warning when -mnu-bnu210 is being used. Now we have one more trouble with DJGPP port of gcc-2.95.3: -gcoff seems to be broken Unfortunatelly it was not detected before uploading files to ftp.delorie.com. Otherwise I should have to consider it as showstopper ... Andris