Re: powerpc64 gcc compiler ...
Sven Luther writes:
> First, i found that this gcc-3.4 package in experimental wasn't yet
> built on powerpc, which i did. It did output lot of FAILs in the tests
> later on, but i am not sure this is worrying or not.
Please have a look at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/ and compare.
> It builds simple binaries without problems. But it didn't build the
> biarch toolchain, so it was of no use for me.
>
> After a bit of investigation, i found out that :
>
> --target=powerpc64-linux --with-cpu=default32
both s390 and sparc build the 32bit compiler and patch gcc/config.gcc
to include the 64bit specific Makefile chunks. At least this installs
things in a <arch>-linux subdirectory, not <arch>-linux64. I don't
know if there other changes building this way. Look at the -biarch
patches in debian/patches.
> I don't really know what the plans are for ppc64 support, but i hear
> that biarch userland is a post sarge issue. Also, i understood that we
> will not switch over to gcc 3.4 for sarge, which is the reason why it is
> in experimental currently. Or maybe it would be possible to have gcc 3.4
> in unstable and later sarge, without it necessarily being the default ?
not one more compiler in sarge. If we want to have 3.4 in sarge, we
should drop 3.2 first. If 3.4 is released, built for all Debian
architectures and no regressions found for packages which replace
their 3.3 counterparts, then lets propose this to debian-release ...
Upstream development asked/proposed Linux distributions to include a
libstdc++6 in current releases.
> What i am trying to do, and what would be nice, would be to have at
> least ppc64 kernels for the sarge release, since some boxes may need
> this and will have trouble with 32bit kernels. Don't know if this is
> realistic, but it seems to me that only gcc support is needed in order
> to achieve that. I hear that a 64bit procps and module-init-tools will
> be needed too, and probably a libncurses, which may be a problem, but
> let's worry about this later.
well, you need a lib64c6-dev as well. Unsure how much prepared the
glibc sources are and if the glibc maintainers are willing to include
such packages for sarge.
> Anyway, my question here is if you would consider it reasonable to
> enable the powerpc biarch toolchain, and have it default to 32bit for
> gcc 3.4 ? This should cause no problem for ordinary powerpc, but would
> allow to build ppc64 stuff with the same toolchain. Am i correct with
> this assumption ? I will try tomorrow to build this, but would it make
> sense to enable this in the experimental powerpc packages ? And what
> about the not gcc or cxx compilers ?
Including your patches is ok, enable it by default not, as lib64c6-dev
is missing as a build dependency. To disable the runtime lib64raries
you do not want add a patch like sparc-config-ml or s390-config-ml.
At least for gcj you you have to do some extra configury, as it builds
the gtk based peer classes, for which you don't have dependent
lib64raries.
Matthias
Reply to: