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

Re: build failures & compiler versions



On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 12:08:53PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> I am maintaining a package that fails to build on alpha, hppa, and s390.
> It appears that the problem is that those architectures use gcc/g++-3.0,
> rather than 2.95, as the default compiler.  The source would need to be
> modified (not hugely, perhaps) to compile with gcc/g++-3.0.

The default compiler on alpha is still gcc 2.95, to the best of my
knowledge.  If the autobuilders are using 3.x, this is not reflected in
the default package layout for the architecture.

There is another issue, which is that g++ 2.95 is fairly *broken* on
alphas, and you need to disable optimization by compiling with -O0 to get
most complex C++ code to compile on that arch.  For further information
on enabling compile options on an arch-dependent basis, see the rules
file for unixodbc, for example.

> This package also uses the KDE2/Qt2 environment, which I know is due to
> be replaced in unstable.  Upstream has written a version that is ported
> over to KDE3/Qt3, and I believe, gcc/g++-3.0.

> I understand that KDE3 is being held up from moving into sid because of
> hold-ups with changing to gcc-3.x.  Am I correct in this?

I believe the g++ migration is now the only thing we're waiting on for
KDE3.

> So now I have, I guess, two questions.  Does anyone know how long it is
> expected to be before the new default compiler and KDE3 move into sid?
> If it is expected to be relatively shortly, I will concentrate my
> efforts on the new version.

> The other question is, is this acceptable - that is, can I allow a build
> failure on three architectures for a few {weeks,days}, or is that just
> deemed too lazy?  My personal feeling is that if the new compiler and
> KDE3 aren't due in sid within about two weeks, I should go ahead and try
> to deal with the source changes.  This involves a fair amount of
> research for me, so I wanted to ask other's opinions before I started
> mucking about with it.

Various people have stated an intention to make gcc 3.x (for x >= 2) the
default compiler for sarge.  If upstream already has a new version of the
package that works with g++ 3.x and KDE3, I wouldn't recommend that you
spend a lot of time trying to get your current version of the package to
work with gcc 3.x -- especially since, on alpha at least, you *can't*
compile Qt-based packages using g++ 3.x.

If you have some time and energy to devote to the matter, I would suggest
talking with the toolchain maintainers about whether there's anything you
could do to help get the gcc 3.x transition moving forward.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpxV4u86DaTX.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: