[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sparc buildd a cross-compiler?

On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 07:07:06PM +0100, Mikael Hedin wrote:
> Ben Collins writes:
>  > Start you own build on vore.debian.org and find it there.
> Smart.  You should be our leader ;-)  Sorry for being rather stupid.
> Anyway, g++-3.0 seems to be completely broken on sparc.  int
> main(){return(0);} gets a bus error.  So I guess I'll just don't build
> on sparc.  Unless I get a really easy way to fix this (butit seems to
> me to be something unsopported in g++-2.95):

Of course it is broken. It is _not_ supported on sparc, other than to
make it available to users. _I_ do not want anything built on sparc that
doesn't use the default compiler (except in cases such as libc6-sparc64
where we obviously have to use the 64-bit capable gcc-3.0 compiler).

It should be policy that programs are required to use the default
compiler on an arch. You create serious overhead on arch maintainence
when you ignore that.

> In file included from ../gsmlib/gsm_me_ta.h:20,
>                  from gsm_phonebook.cc:20:
> ../gsmlib/gsm_sms_store.h:109: parse error before `<'
> ../gsmlib/gsm_sms_store.h:115: parse error before `int'
> ../gsmlib/gsm_sms_store.h:122: `gsmlib::operator *()' must have an argument of class or enumerated type
> ../gsmlib/gsm_sms_store.h:122: `gsmlib::operator *()' must take either one or two arguments
> ../gsmlib/gsm_sms_store.h:123: `gsmlib::operator ->()' must be a nonstatic member function

Don't discount sparc just because the code is broken. That's a bug in
itself. Fix the code, get it to compile. SPARC is one of the most tested
archs we have, so if it is broken there, you have some serious issues
anyway, and covering it by not building on sparc is not the answer.

I don't do C++, so you'll have to ask some experts.


/                   Ben Collins    --    Debian GNU/Linux                  \
`  bcollins@debian.org  --  bcollins@openldap.org  --  bcollins@linux.com  '

Reply to: