This is the mail archive of the
libffi-discuss@sourceware.org
mailing list for the libffi project.
Re: libffi fails to build on powerpc64-linux
- From: David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: libffi-discuss at sourceware dot org, Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>, Anthony Green <green at moxielogic dot com>, kyle at moffetthome dot net, dclarke at blastwave dot org
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 21:37:31 -0500
- Subject: Re: libffi fails to build on powerpc64-linux
> On Tue, 2012-03-06 at 09:34 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 22:18 -0500, Anthony Green wrote:
> > > At this point, I'm hoping that Kyle Moffett, the author of this patch
> > > can have a look. ?My guess is that either I mis-applied the patch, or
> > > he posted the wrong patch to apply.
> >
> > Agreed, it would be nice for Kyle to comment. ?Looking at the bugzilla
> > above, he said:
> >
> > > This passes the testsuite on soft-floating-point PowerPC, and it builds
> > > and passes the testsuite on PowerPC e500 systems which cannot even
> > > assemble the regular floating-point instruction set.
> >
> > Both of these are non FP power systems, so I can see why he didn't
> > see these build errors, since the broken code is inside of
> > "#ifndef __NO_FPRS__" (double negative?).
>
> Looking at the bugzilla further, I noticed Kyle has a blog here that
> mentions he has moved to Google, so that explains why his email address
> was bouncing. ?I'm also guessing he's no longer interested in PowerPC
> issues now that he's no longer at Boeing.
>
> That said, looking farther down that debian bugzilla, I noticed someone
> complained about his patch breaking the debian build. ?He attached a
> patch:
>
> ?http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=40;filename=libffi-powerpc-build-fix.patch;att=1;bug=644338
>
> If you ignore the debian specific changes and look at the src/powerpc/ffi.c
> change, you'll see it's the same as my patch, minus the hunks of my patch
> that are silencing warnings, so I think my patch is probably safe to take
> as is. ?Therefore, I'm officially submitting the patch below to fix the
> build issues.
>
> That still leaves the 32-bit many.c testsuite breakage I am seeing, but I
> think that should be fixed in a separate patch since it is not related to
> these changes at all.
>
> Peter
Adding a different email address for Kyle to possibly entice him to
participate in this email thread.
- David