Re: crosstool-0.32 released

[Dan Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> but the entries for "sh3" still show failure across the board, despite
> the fact i've built a chain for that.  thoughts?

It's not that dire.

gcc-4.0.0 fails to build sh toolchains simply
because I haven't backported patches from glibc cvs
to make it comptible with gcc-4.0.0.  It's not hard.

gcc-3.4.3 + glibc-2.3.x seem to build
ok sh3 toolchains:

sh3-gcc-3.4.3-glibc-2.3.2.dat.txt:toolchain=PASS
sh3-gcc-3.4.3-glibc-2.3.3.dat.txt:toolchain=PASS
sh3-gcc-3.4.3-glibc-2.3.4.dat.txt:toolchain=PASS
sh3-gcc-3.4.3-glibc-2.3.5.dat.txt:toolchain=PASS

The build matrix shows kernel failing there,
but that doesn't mean the toolchain is
neccessarily bad.

Also, gcc-3.3.5 + glibc-2.3.x seem to build ok
*sh4* toolchains, but for some time now, they
fail to build libstdc++.  See e.g.
http://kegel.com/crosstool/crosstool-0.28-rc37/buildlogs/0.28/sh3-gcc-3.3.4-glibc-2.3.2.log.txt
http://kegel.com/crosstool/crosstool-0.32/buildlogs/sh3-gcc-3.3.5-glibc-2.3.5.log.txt
which both fail in the same spot.
That might be worth looking into, but only if you're
really determined to use gcc-3.3.x and can't move
up to gcc-3.4.x.

Which versions of gcc, glibc, and Linux work for you,
and are you using sanititzed headers?
- Dan

--
Trying to get a job as a c++ developer?  See http://kegel.com/academy/getting-hired.html


------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com