gcc-3.2 bug, and a general question
Greetings! atlas needs 2.95 to build -- 3.2 gives the following
(segfault) error:
=============================================================================
/home/camm/usr/bin/gcc -c -DL2SIZE=524288 -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include/Linux_m68k_3.2 -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include/contrib -DAdd__ -DStringSunStyle -DATL_OS_Linux -DATL_FOPENDELAY -fomit-frame-pointer -O3 -funroll-all-loops ../emit_mm.c
/home/camm/usr/bin/gcc -DL2SIZE=524288 -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include/Linux_m68k_3.2 -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include/contrib -DAdd__ -DStringSunStyle -DATL_OS_Linux -DATL_FOPENDELAY -fomit-frame-pointer -O3 -funroll-all-loops -o xemit_mm emit_mm.o
cd /home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/bin/Linux_m68k_3.2 ; make xccobj
make[8]: Entering directory `/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/bin/Linux_m68k_3.2'
/home/camm/usr/bin/gcc -DL2SIZE=524288 -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include/Linux_m68k_3.2 -I/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/include/contrib -DAdd__ -DStringSunStyle -DATL_OS_Linux -DATL_FOPENDELAY -fomit-frame-pointer -O3 -funroll-all-loops -o xccobj ../ccobj.c -DTOPDIR=/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS
make[8]: Leaving directory `/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/bin/Linux_m68k_3.2'
cp -f /home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/bin/Linux_m68k_3.2/xccobj .
rm -f smm.c
./xemit_mm -p s -ta T -tb N -muladd 0 -l 1 \
-L JIK -M 44 -N 44 -K 44 -m 1 -n 1 -k 44 \
-lda 44 -ldb 44 -ldc 0 -csA 1 -csB 1 -csC 1\
-F0 -1 -FN 0 -FF 0 -b 1 -a 1 -Z 1 -C 1\
> smm.c
pre=s, CU=1, ma=0, ff=0, if=-1, nf=0, lo=1, ta=112, tb=111, lat=1, mu=1, nu=1, ku=44, m=44, n=44, k=44, lda=44, ldb=44, ldc=0, csA=1, csB=1, csC=1, alpha=1, beta=1
make[7]: *** [mmcase] Error 139
make[7]: Leaving directory `/home/camm/4.1/ATLAS/tune/blas/gemm/Linux_m68k_3.2'
ERROR IN COMMAND: make mmcase pre=s loopO=JIK ta=T tb=N mb=44 nb=44 kb=44 lda=44 ldb=44 ldc=0 mu=1 nu=1 ku=44 alpha=1 beta=1 muladd=0 lat=1 cleanup=1
PROPOSED FILENAME: res/sJIKmmTN44_44x44x44_44x44x0_1x1x44_a1_b1_0x1_1
make[6]: *** [res/snreg] Error 255
=============================================================================
Is this worth filing as a bug against the gcc package, or would some
knowledgeable m68k person like to take a look?
Separately, a general question -- there are several large software
packages I maintain which occasionally require special maintenance on
m68k (e.g. GCL, maxima, ACL2, atlas, lapack). I don't mind getting
these to work as long as someone out there finds it useful. What are
people using thee boxes for nowadays? Does anyone care if m68k just
gets dropped from the Architectures control field for these very large
specialized packages?
Take care,
--
Camm Maguire camm@enhanced.com
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah
Reply to: